Casual meditation VS advanced Sadhana

[MarkusSweden]

To me, meditation happens spontaneously, it's never a disciplin, it just happens when I spend time on my own - for example when I driving my car, when I'm on a train or having a bath at home. I call it casual meditation. 

My overall wellbeing is rather good and I feel happy and at peace most of the time. But one can always feel better and optimise ones life(I guess). 

Could any spiritual practice evolve my state further? Like a yoga disciplin or Sadhana? 

Or do I better not bother about that, since I don't feel any direct need for a discipline?

Maybe my contemplation/meditation that happens automatically is enough, or should I devote more time through a method/discipline? 

[Faceless]

Can you watch the entire movement of thought without (the watcher)

Without the watcher coming in and labeling, judging, and so on. Without the watcher imposing its idea of what should be onto what is.

 

Not ‘the watcher’ watching the movement of thought, but thought itself watching as thought arises. 

But again, you are not watching, as that implies the you with all its accumulated memory’s responding with those memory’s, to that very watching. 

 

To observe thought without the thinker at all. 

That is ‘the beginning’ of real meditation. 

 

[MarkusSweden]

8 minutes ago, Faceless said:

 

To observe thought without the thinker at all. 

That is ‘the beginning’ of real meditation. 

 

Yes, it is, it's quite beautiful, indeed!

Have you tried sadhana btw, or are you completely self realised?

Have you noticed I changed my profile pic, you know who that beautiful girl is?  

Edited June 7, 2018 by MarkusSweden

[Faceless]

1 hour ago, MarkusSweden said:

Have you tried sadhana

?

1 hour ago, MarkusSweden said:

or are you completely self realised?

?

I think you may want to go into if this sadhana was a movement of (time)...The thinker with its movement of psychological becoming. This implies an entity who is constantly reaching and grasping to become in time.

 

Do you see the contradiction here??

 

Also ask oneself, am “I” attempting to meditate according to a blueprint, to do so implies that there is an “entity/the me” who has acquired the knowledge of the past that is going to meditate. Again duality. Because the entity is the same movement of knowledge, experience, memory. 

 

Do you see it? 

 

All this implies duality. The division of The meditator/ the method that has been passed down through tradition. It’s a direct contradiction. Because no matter the case the mediator divides himself right from the getgo.

If there is any movement division/duality one will perpetuate contradiction. 

Edited June 7, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

57 minutes ago, MarkusSweden said:

Have you noticed I changed my profile pic, you know who that beautiful girl is?  

Yeah I noticed. I don’t know who anyone is man. You know me. She looks like she does her own thing though?

[robdl]

2 hours ago, Faceless said:

Not ‘the watcher’ watching the movement of thought, but thought itself watching as thought arises. 

But again, you are not watching, as that implies the you with all its accumulated memory’s responding with those memory’s, to that very watching. 

 

To observe thought without the thinker at all. 

That is ‘the beginning’ of real meditation. 

 

Hey Faceless, can you go into that a bit more -- "thought itself watching as thought arises"?   I'm trying to understand the subtle distinction between thought itself watching and the thinker watching. 

Can "thought itself watching" only be described in negating terms and not in any positive terms?  If you put it in any positive terms, then I'm guessing it reinforces the watcher entity?

Edited June 7, 2018 by robdl

[Nahm]

@MarkusSweden

[MarkusSweden]

@Nahm Beautiful! Simple and clear. 

Love how good art/music has a common ground with what we do here! 

[Nahm]

@MarkusSweden “Freedom’s just another word for nothin left to lose” 

@Faceless??

[MarkusSweden]

10 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@MarkusSweden “Freedom’s just another word for nothin left to lose” 

Ah, @Nahm, feel a synchronicity with you! 

Sometimes I only find God in music, thanks God for music.

I'm actually happy I wasn't around in the 60's, that way I can romanise it into an era where nothing happened but the music of Dylan, Joplin, The Doors. Jefferson Airplane among my other heroes. 

But there is one music-God above all else, and you know who that is.   

Edited June 7, 2018 by MarkusSweden

[Nahm]

@MarkusSweden ”and feelin good was good enough for me”

You too man. ❤️

Tom Jones, obviously. I agree that it’s ‘not unusual’ at all. 

[Faceless]

2 hours ago, robdl said:

Hey Faceless, can you go into that a bit more -- "thought itself watching as thought arises"?   I'm trying to understand the subtle distinction between thought itself watching and the thinker watching. 

Can "thought itself watching" only be described in negating terms and not in any positive terms?  If you put it in any positive terms, then I'm guessing it reinforces the watcher entity?

I will get back to you my friend. Going to take the boy to the beach?

[Faceless]

4 hours ago, robdl said:

I'm trying to understand the subtle distinction between thought itself watching and the thinker watching. 

What does it imply when the thinker is watching? 

It implies a choosing between, excepting or denying, and so on. 

It implies a movement of observation that becomes influenced by the past. All the psychological accumulation that the thinker has stored up. 

The very obersvation itself is then a movement of duality. The fact cannot be observed because the accumulated content of the i with its accumulated psychological preferences has denied the fact and implemented the idea that was gathered from knowledge/memory

It has then imposed its own bias and prejudices over the fact of what is. 

Edited June 7, 2018 by Faceless

[Faceless]

@robdl do you see that so far? 

Example would be your observing yourself (fear) the fact, but are imposing/replacing that fact with an idea. 

So it’s not a pure observation. It’s a movement of thought/thinker moving in its conditioned pattern.

Edited June 7, 2018 by Faceless

[robdl]

Just now, Faceless said:

@robdl do you see that so far? 

I indeed see the inherent duality of the "thinker" watching thoughts.  Just struggling with how one observes without doing this --- thought watching itself, as you mentioned.  But I'm also aware that "how" questions invite effort, method, time, technique --- which is further duality.  So I'm kind of at an impasse.

[Faceless]

2 minutes ago, robdl said:

I indeed see the inherent duality of the "thinker" watching thoughts.  Just struggling with how one observes without doing this --- thought watching itself, as you mentioned.  But I'm also aware that "how" questions invite effort, method, time, technique --- which is further duality.  So I'm kind of at an impasse.

Just keep exploring into it. You are getting this really well. 

 

I edited more onto my last post. You see it?

[Faceless]

@robdl

See in yourself (actually), if there can be a pure observation without the accumulated content/movement of the observer. 

 

From what I see from your in the ability to suspend bias and prejudice, I think you have a great chance at doing this. 

You seem to not move in as much of a fragmentated and mechanical way. Which is essential.

 

Edited June 7, 2018 by Faceless

[Prabhaker]

9 hours ago, MarkusSweden said:

Could any spiritual practice evolve my state further? Like a yoga disciplin or Sadhana? 

Don't be in a hurry. Truth is not cheap. Beyond the crucifix , lies the throne. 

[robdl]

3 minutes ago, Faceless said:

@robdl

See in yourself (actually), if there can be a pure observation without the accumulated content/movement of the observer. 

 

From what I see from your in the ability to suspend bias and prejudice, I think you have a great chance at doing this. 

You seem to not move in as much of a fragmentated and mechanical way. Which is essential.

 

Thanks man -- I'm encouraged.  I'll keep investigating.

[Faceless]

@robdl

Also think of this investigation as seeing what not to do. To see immediately the contradiction in what has already been established through the stream of thought/the past. As in tradition/culturally ‘ways’ to attain that which infinite. Lol

You know? 

Some go decades if ever without getting out of contradiction/time.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Faceless