That thought had occurred to me also. If awareness is taken to mean nondual awareness, then *all* awareness is choiceless. It's happening right now, effortlessly, all you need to do is ... be aware of it.
Does that sound about right to you?
That thought had occurred to me also. If awareness is taken to mean nondual awareness, then *all* awareness is choiceless. It's happening right now, effortlessly, all you need to do is ... be aware of it.
Mindfulness is not that difficult to learn. But to have it happen, on its own, without any effort or intention or goal, a spontaneous arising more or less ... that's, by definition, impossible to learn, because learning it is intentionalizing it.
Same with playing a harmonica.
So it would be like the harmonica was a cinch to learn, but to truly *play* it you'd have to suddenly, without intention, be ... playing it!PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 6:45 pmSame with playing a harmonica.
My point is that it’s not some highly advanced or impossible yoga or something
Not really. I mean, it’s not like a sneeze.Rick wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 7:20 pmSo it would be like the harmonica was a cinch to learn, but to truly *play* it you'd have to suddenly, without intention, be ... playing it!PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 6:45 pmSame with playing a harmonica.
My point is that it’s not some highly advanced or impossible yoga or something
There is no such thing as nondual awareness. Your definition proves my point.
Does that mean that pristine consciousness or the basis has no awareness? Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to ask this.Malcolm wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 11:38 pmThere is no kind of awareness intelligence that can be found outside the mental aggregate.Rick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:19 pm Krishnamurti regarded thought as limited, and that to experience the unlimited, if it existed, something other than thought was called for. He called this intelligence and said that being choicelessly aware in the present moment might enable intelligence to manifest.
If awareness is taken to mean a subject (awarer) and an object (awared), nondual awareness makes no sense.
Rick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:48 amIf awareness is taken to mean a subject (awarer) and an object (awared), nondual awareness makes no sense.
If awareness is taken to mean no subject, no object, just awareness, nondual awareness would be the right term for it.
We all know subject/object awareness exists (conventionally), we experience it 10,000 times a day. As for whether subject/object-free 'pure' awareness exists, well, that's (way!) above my pay grade, though I'm sure Buddha said something definitive about it.
TharpaChodron wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:23 amDoes that mean that pristine consciousness or the basis has no awareness? Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to ask this.Malcolm wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 11:38 pmThere is no kind of awareness intelligence that can be found outside the mental aggregate.Rick wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:19 pm Krishnamurti regarded thought as limited, and that to experience the unlimited, if it existed, something other than thought was called for. He called this intelligence and said that being choicelessly aware in the present moment might enable intelligence to manifest.
I think an incorrect understanding of what rigpa is is the cause of confusion here. A still persistent early translation as 'awareness' does not help either. Realising rigpa would resolve this issue and take away all doubt. And subject object thinking appearing would not cease as long as you're a sentient being. Putting it into words, I think a description of the view would say rigpa does not exist nor does it not exist? (Please correct me if i'm wrong.)Rick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:48 amIf awareness is taken to mean a subject (awarer) and an object (awared), nondual awareness makes no sense.
If awareness is taken to mean no subject, no object, just awareness, nondual awareness would be the right term for it.
We all know subject/object awareness exists (conventionally), we experience it 10,000 times a day. As for whether subject/object-free 'pure' awareness exists, well, that's (way!) above my pay grade, though I'm sure Buddha said something definitive about it.
Too late!Archie2009 wrote: ↑Don't turn into your own philosopher.
The term “awareness” itself implies a subject and an object. One cannot be aware of a nondual awareness, by definition, since it cannot be reflexively aware.Rick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:48 amIf awareness is taken to mean a subject (awarer) and an object (awared), nondual awareness makes no sense.
If awareness is taken to mean no subject, no object, just awareness, nondual awareness would be the right term for it.
We all know subject/object awareness exists (conventionally), we experience it 10,000 times a day. As for whether subject/object-free 'pure' awareness exists, well, that's (way!) above my pay grade, though I'm sure Buddha said something definitive about it.
While that may be true, the subject/object dichotomy is not the same as the subject engaged in “choiceless awareness”.
This is just just a form of indifference. What’s profound about that? This not even shamatha, much less insight.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:50 pmWhile that may be true, the subject/object dichotomy is not the same as the subject engaged in “choiceless awareness”.
It’s like, if someone hands me a lunch menu, yes there is a difference between me and the menu. But if I say, “oh bring me whatever—it doesn’t make any difference to me” this is like the meditator who simply observes. And at some point, the distinction between observer and that which is observed (subject and object) becomes moot. When choosing ceases, it ceases to be a cause. It is no longer a contributing factor supporting the subject/object duality.
Archie2009 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:45 amTharpaChodron wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:23 amDoes that mean that pristine consciousness or the basis has no awareness? Apologies if this is not the appropriate place to ask this.I think an incorrect understanding of what rigpa is is the cause of confusion here. A still persistent early translation as 'awareness' does not help either. Realising rigpa would resolve this issue and take away all doubt. And subject object thinking appearing would not cease as long as you're a sentient being. Putting it into words, I think a description of the view would say rigpa does not exist nor does it not exist? (Please correct me if i'm wrong.)Rick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:48 amIf awareness is taken to mean a subject (awarer) and an object (awared), nondual awareness makes no sense.
If awareness is taken to mean no subject, no object, just awareness, nondual awareness would be the right term for it.
We all know subject/object awareness exists (conventionally), we experience it 10,000 times a day. As for whether subject/object-free 'pure' awareness exists, well, that's (way!) above my pay grade, though I'm sure Buddha said something definitive about it.
After realising rigpa, texts like chos dbyings mdzod, etc. would make sense. Not having this realisation and engaging in speculation by letting your mind run wild and figuring things out intellectually will only get you more confused. Confusion is dispelled 'on the cushion'. When there is a need to have things put into words, read the texts and listen to modern teachings, but use them as a pointer. Don't turn into your own philosopher.
My 2 cents.
Malcolm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:25 pmThe term “awareness” itself implies a subject and an object. One cannot be aware of a nondual awareness, by definition, since it cannot be reflexively aware.Rick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:48 amIf awareness is taken to mean a subject (awarer) and an object (awared), nondual awareness makes no sense.
If awareness is taken to mean no subject, no object, just awareness, nondual awareness would be the right term for it.
We all know subject/object awareness exists (conventionally), we experience it 10,000 times a day. As for whether subject/object-free 'pure' awareness exists, well, that's (way!) above my pay grade, though I'm sure Buddha said something definitive about it.