Joseph Maynor

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    15,039

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Joseph Maynor

  3. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    5 minutes ago, Bob84 said:

    @Joseph Maynor depends on your personal definition of ego. Find the word comparable to the word god. Noone means the same thing.

    In a sense ego lets you enjoy life. We get excited about something. We mentaly mastrubate to motivate ourselfs. So in that way its a requirement for life. Ofcourse its also responsible for all the negative stuff.

    The thing is, you believe yourself to be the ego. Which you are not. When you seperate yourself from it (enlightenment, trancendens, etc) it becomes a tool. Instead of you life, that its now.

    I find it disconcerting that we can't define these terms more consistently.  Everybody does seem to have and use their own definitions.

  4. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    Pardon my ignorance folks, but I still don't understand this.   Somebody please help me.  Are other people illusory?   What about their minds?  Their minds are not in my reality so am I to conclude their minds don't exist?  This sounds absurd to me.  Maybe they're just like me and I am part of their non-dual reality.  But that's concept and has no bearing on my reality.  In my reality other people lack minds.  Are their minds part of my reality or not?  It seems we cannot say that they are.  Well what does that do to our existential claim that others exist? It seems to go bye bye because we cannot confirm that claim by referencing reality alone, we would have to cling to concept too, and that's a no no when we're talking about reality.

  5. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    Get it.  I read several books in it that were excellent.  Kinda took me from the newbie to intermediate level in personal development a couple of years ago.  I listened to many of the books as audiobooks.  Surprisingly a lot of them are on Audible.  I prefer audiobooks to paper books.

  6. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    6 minutes ago, SOUL said:

    Stripping concept from reality being a key to enlightenment is a concept that would need to be stripped from reality as a key of enlightenment then.... jussayin

    No, I'm talking about accepting or releasing a concept.  I advance no theory.  I can observe reality without accepting a concept of reality or a concept of me.  I could release those concepts with no change to empirical reality.  That's what I'm saying.  It's expressed conceptually, but I'm referring to awareness, accepting, and releasing only.  I also don't like the word empirical reality but I'm using the term to mean a snapshot of awareness in a moment.  It's hard not to use that term.

  7. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    12 minutes ago, blazed said:

    You need to be brutally honest if you are though, and that might be the case for you but forums is strictly reading and mental masturbation.

    In art we have a saying 1/50 ratio, for 1 session of theory, you do 50 sessions of practice, because you're not going to get anywhere in art by reading books and watching tutorials only.

    It's happening to me now.  It's unsettling.  What a paradigm shift. I still have a few matters to clear up though.  Like do others people's emptinesses exist, and is that experientially confirmable or am I just clinging to concept with that assumption.  

  8. Posted

    1 minute ago, blazed said:

    I said this a few months ago and I basically got booed (not really) and I left the forums for a while, I'm still not very active, there are people living on these forums and not doing anything to be fair, just deluding progress.

    The forums should auto block people out of the here for a few months after spamming too many posts :D that would probably help them more than they think.

    Maybe they're growing on here.  I know I am.

  9. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    Another epiphany folks, I think.  The ego, or concept of being a separate self,  is concept and therefore not part of reality.  And consciousness work is basically working on stopping to cling to the concept of ego in all of its manifestations.  Is this right?  Releasing the concept of being a separate thing in all of the manifestations.  Stripping that nugget of idealism from reality!  We can cling to the concept of ego or release it.  And this has no effect on reality whatsoever either way.  Am I on track here?  

  10. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    16 minutes ago, ajasatya said:

    no. you're on track. keep going.

    if you say that Reality just is and that separation is a concept, then what is it that says "my skandhas"? what is it that possesses skandhas?
    you don't have to verbalize an answer. you don't have to answer it here. just contemplate the question and go further.

    it is one of the biggies. but be careful not to think that you're done. if you notice true enlightened masters, you'll see that they completely embody Truth. they think, speak and act naturally accordingly to their insights. their moral behavior is straightforward, clean and compassionate. they move their bodies gracefully in calm and relaxed ways.

    the more i read and meditate, the more i appreciate the term self-mastery that @Leo Gura uses. for me, it feels like becoming a servant of Truth.

    Yeah skandhas is a concept, you're right.  Think of what I'm referring to by the word though which is -- what's in your experience in a moment.  That's what I mean.  Skandhas is just a way to communicate that in writing or speaking.  It's a pointing to awareness basically.  But I see your point, even that is a concept that adds a little nugget of idealism to reality.  Reality is independent of concept.  If I do not cling to any concept, nothing in reality changes for me.  If I release any concept, nothing in reality changes for me.  I'm sure you get what I'm trying to say here.  It's hard to write clearly about this stuff, but I am trying very hard.  It's laborious.

  11. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    20 minutes ago, SOUL said:

    Meditation, consciousness, enlightenment and spirituality are a very subjective experience so I'm not sure who or what can be the arbiter of what is valuable or legitimate.

    Does this just become another place where group think rules as doctrine and the infinite divergence of personal expression gets shut out? What makes absolute sense to one may be non sense to another so majority accepted ideas and concepts doesn't make for validity.

    I agree there has been some thread flooding and personal attacking going on but by internet standards it's tame so I hope it's only the most egregious examples of it that get handled and it doesn't end this venue to explore these topics and our experience of them.

    Maybe it's the tone that's the problem. Arguing can get nasty.  Often a downward-spiral of suffering because everybody's got their mouths wide open but has their fingers in their ears.  We all do this to a greater or lesser extent, myself included.  Cable news does this to the extreme.  So, I can appreciate Leo's fear.  That said, I agree with you 100% SOUL.  You sound like a stage yellow person right there.  I think I'm at yellow too.

  12. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    I can see how non-dualists think all is one if you strip concept out of reality and just take what is in the skandhas in the moment as what is real.  Am I off target here folks?

    Take the case of my mom.  One might contend that my mom is part of me when I sense her, and only those elements in my skandhas are really real.  Therefore, my mom is mostly concept.  Am I making sense?  Thinking of my mom as real is like taking a little nugget of idealism and adding it to reality.  What is in my skandhas that I call my mom is not the same as the concept of my mom that I might choose to cling to or to release in a moment.  But reality is not bothered at all by whether I cling to or release that concept.  Therefore, whatever reality is is independent of that concept of my mom that I am clinging to.  My mom is really just a collection of items in my shandhas that change every moment.  Visuals, audibles, touches, etc.  That's my mom really.  And there is no cause to separate-out these items from my skandhas and label them as a separate thing.  That too would be clinging to concept.  Reality just is.  Furthermore, there is no cause to bifurcate reality because that would be clinging to concept, like taking a little nugget of idealism and adding it to reality, looking at reality as though you were looking through a warped lens.  Have I gotten it finally folks!  I think this is the big insight here.  At least one of the biggies.

    And this is changing me, this realization.  I can already feel myself transforming.  So, this is not just intellectual masturbation here.  This is an epiphany basically.  The second one I had on here.

  14. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    On 6/26/2017 at 7:32 AM, Prabhaker said:

    @Dino D  

    @Rali was the only member who claimed that he is fully enlightened , but he was banned today on this forum. You know that enlightened persons are sometimes very naughty.

    He really does claim that eh?  Fully enlightened.  Wow.  I don't even know what that means.  

  15. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    Doesn't this thesis or concept put us a tad into the matrix too?  A tad into theoretical idealism?  Reality just is.  The ego is concept, an idea.  I can cling to or release the concept of ego.  I do not need to define or view  myself or reality through that prism.  In fact, it seems erroneous on the surface to do so, does it not?  It's like an apple believing it's a Red Delicious in some fundamental way.

  16. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    11 hours ago, SOUL said:

    @Joseph Maynor  Did I quote or tag you in my comment? I guess you must think it applies to you, this is something you may examine more closely in your self, especially since you just challenged my comment.

    Again, my original epiphany has nothing to do with argument.  It's an epiphany, an observation.  It's not a theory.  The act of arguing about that epiphany vs the epiphany itself are apples and oranges.  Similar to the distinction between concept or theory of reality and reality itself.  Apples and oranges there as well.

  17. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    42 minutes ago, SOUL said:

    Using words and concepts to challenge other's words and concepts while denying attachment to them.... a classic blind spot in one's awareness.

    I'm not challenging.  I've posted an observation and asked for feedback,  others are challenging me, as I requested them to do. I'm the proponent here not the challenger, the guy making the claim not the critic.  I'm really starting to see the depths of this epiphany now.  It's awesome.  I'm in the woods right now contemplating this.

  18. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    16 minutes ago, Nichols Harvey said:

    Totally agree with all of your last comment. 

    I'm familiar with this non conceptual view of reality. But I've never quite been able to see how it's sustainable for more than a few seconds.

    What I've worked out that the best we can do with non conceptual awareness is use it in combination with concepts  to continually update our worldview.  Like I mentioned on your meditation thread.

    Im happy being a person who is able to stop thinking long enough not to keep repeating the past. For me that is enough non conceptual mind to keep me out of mischief  (although it's not entirely fool proof  lol)

     

    It's not a view of reality.  That would be concept.  I'm not talking about an idea, theory, or perspective of or on reality.  It's an awareness of what's in the skandhas in a moment.  Pure awareness of what is in a moment.  Maybe looking is a good analogy.  When I say I need or I fear I'm adding a little nugget of idealism into the purity of reality.  I've stepped into the matrix a tad.  And it was self-induced because I conflated reality with concept.  I clung to that concept rather than releasing it.  See, concepts are not inherently bad, just when I use them to define what I am or what reality is.  It's like getting things ass-backwards.  I precede any concept, and so does reality.

  19. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    5 minutes ago, Nichols Harvey said:

    Well the problem is were always going to be defining. That's what we do. It's actually helpful to a certain extent as you already know  

    Yes.  Less suffering. But not no suffering.  That would not be right. Life would not be worth living without suffering because without that we also get rid of any happiness too. 

    I'm happy with less suffering and more ability to bounce back quicker after every knock.

    For me that brings the ego under a semblance of control rather than trying to dissolve it.  Eventually it's going to be almost non existent

     

     

    But we can become more aware of what we're doing regarding this.  I'm not saying we stop conceptualizing by any means.  I'm a philosopher.  I love concepts.  I just don't use concepts as a prism to view reality.  I take a more direct view, a non-conceptual view of reality.  But concepts have their place.  I can choose to cling or release them more intelligently with increased awareness.

  20. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    1 hour ago, Nichols Harvey said:

    @Joseph Maynor

    Ok. But what are you hoping to achieve?

    A state where you're continually letting go of attachments?

    That sounds like a lot of work to me to be doing that consciously all the time.

    I guess it's a case of being identified most of the time but not being so overwhelmed with it. And that little bit of distance gives us more room for more deeper and candid emotional expression and less contracting and the subsequent distortions that come with contracting 

    A continual stream of making better and better decisions. 

    You're probably better at that than I am already lol. 

    No more suffering and stunting of growth caused by attachment to concepts in the sense that they define me in any way.  So, for example, stop saying you have needs and fears.  Stop attaching to those concepts.  That will not change whatever comes up in your skandhas, even sharp pains.  But you don't have to conceptualize it as anything.  Just experience the feeling without also accepting a concept that says "I have a need".  This is matrix-speak.   By doing this you've stopped looking and started thinking.  You've added a little piece of fantasy to raw reality: a little nugget of idealism.

  21. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    19 minutes ago, Nichols Harvey said:

    As far as I'm concerned you're way off the mark.

    Been there. Done that.  It's just another thought 

    I've actually expanded my view a little bit.  The way I said it initially was too glossy.  It's not that I have no needs.  There may be a thirst in my shandhas.  But I can chose to attach to the concept "I am thirsty" or release the same, could I not?  See the difference?  Reality is one thing, concept is something else.  I can release any concept.

    There may be a sensation in my breast.  But it's another matter altogether to attach to the concept "I have a fear".

    You may experience reality, but it's another matter to attach to the concept "I exist".  You can release this concept.

    So what I think I've discovered is a bifurcation between concept and reality (in the sense of reality as what is, not a theory of reality, which is concept).  This is the counter-intuitive move it seems.

  22. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    2 hours ago, Outer said:

    Well if the concepts are useful for whatever purpose, even if it means releasing concepts, that's cool to me. Do you equal concepts to be the same as stories? A story is the same as concepts to me. They might be a bit different, otherwise two different words wouldn't be used. (unless one forgets language and every word is the same)

    Yeah.  I don't like the word stories because it is too negatively connotated.  Concepts are fine, they just don't capture me.  That's it.  And it's this inversion that I just discovered.  I don't have a fear, I just have a sensation in the skandhas.  See the distinction?  Concept does not define reality.  Reality just is independent of concept.

  23. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    9 minutes ago, Outer said:

    Ok, what's the practical utility of concepts, whats the definition? Dunno, you gotta eat, sleep etc, so you gotta work. If works to be done you probably need some concepts in it, it doesnt really mean anything to me. Can we have some examples of concepts?

    There is no definition needed.  Science is one example of the practical use of concepts.  Concepts are fine, they just aren't me.  I cling to them or release them, that's my relationship to concepts.  And concepts don't underlie me in any way.  That's just a concept too, and I can release that.

  24. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    4 hours ago, ajasatya said:

    the paradox is just a mental object, i agree. but it appears in the mind when we move on from the experience seeking phase and start living life normally. some practitioners experience anxiety due to attachment to mystical experiences because they lack the necessary wisdom to integrate the spiritual experiences into their daily lives.

    i am pretty sure that what i mean by "embrace the paradox" is what you mean by "release the paradox". the internal movement of acceptance is similar (not to say equivalent) to letting go, which is something i had never noticed before. thank you :)

    Ordinary life is not the problem, it's our interpretations of it (concept), and then we wanna build on reality with concept, so we distort the mirror so to speak, which yields a distorted view.  And then we want to cling to this distorted view, which too is concept which can be released.  I'm not denying that what appears in my skandhas is real.  But concepts about what's real is the problem.  We can release those, or cling to them but while doing so be aware of what they are.  Concepts often have practical utility.  But they just can't capture me.  That inverts the horse and cart.  Concepts have no standing outside of my clinging to them or releasing them.

  25. Posted · Edited by Joseph Maynor

    5 hours ago, ajasatya said:

    i've experienced it and i am able to experience it right now. i know what you're talking about. you've experienced pure awareness, the spirit, the immaterial and fundamental emptiness. and i gave you the feedback you asked for. i said that this is just one facet of the paradox.

    But why cling to this paradox?  The paradox is concept.  Couldn't you release that concept?