Sorry, these are class materials.
Sorry, these are class materials.Previous post:
Sorry, these are class materials.
Next post:
Sorry, these are class materials.
Sorry, these are class materials.Previous post:
Sorry, these are class materials.
Next post:
Sorry, these are class materials.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Hey Michael!
I think when the TSK Vision is sucessfully implemented, the surfaces give way to space and are more transitory; time functions differently, or awareness allows for time to be ’seen’ and experienced in different ways…even suffering becomes expanded, so that I cannot really label it as ’suffering’ anymore. Opening it up, or expanding it by diving right into it, alleviates the suffering by opening knowing up to everything else available within awareness…joy, peace, etc. I can still ask the question why we typically believe that suffering is a part of life or has to be for us to learn…but I know the why…I have been conditioned to believe that and have always taken that as a ‘fact of life’, until TSK that is…LOL. I am not saying here that it is not just that, I am saying that going deeper into it, and questioning it’s finality, opens it up to something ‘other’. It doesn’t make the reasons for the suffering go away, it just allows for more freedom within being, and offers a way of opening the focus on suffering, and could possibly and has, opened knowing up into temporary solutions, which solutions are just that, temporary…what works today might not work tomorrow. In other words, b/c of the TSK Vision, I have found that I can ‘move through’ the suffering and open it up, expanding it to allow space for joy and peace to enter in, which turns the suffering into something else, not so solid. It is only when I get ‘trapped’ in my thinking or my focus that the suffering is so intense. I am so use to living in the moment, but since the move, I have had so many things to do, that I find myself struggling, trying to stay out of a negative past and out of a planned future…and to not doubt myself so much, my choices and decisions, and whether or not blah, blah, blah…doesn’t mean to say however that I should not consider my options and be open to what unfolds…the scattered part will settle down, but life is still life…I am more determined than ever to allow it to unfold it’s myriad possibilities, and to pay attention, and make myself available for the opportunities that present constantly within awareness unfolding…as far as experiencing, and your understanding of the text, I think you are ‘right on’ in your assessment. To go beneath the surface, is not to ‘do away with it’, b/c as you stated, there are just more surfaces…in my experience, being can connect to the energies of time which opens space for the mingling of what opens, to where all surfaces are seen as transparent, or space. It has brought a huge sense of well-being and also a connectedness to all that is, which would of course include these surfaces…I also believe that everyone has experienced this connectedness that allows separation to ‘disappear’ for a time; it is easily forgotten however, and mostly not recognized at all b/c of the way we have been conditioned, and, if it is experienced, it is usually labeled as ’something else’. But, even that ’something else’ is available for inquiry and opening…
Anyway, thnx for the reply…discussing these things helps to clarify them…and as long as I do not solidify them into absolutes, then I would say that the TSK Vision is doing it’s thing as long as ‘I’ get out of the way and allow it to…
Love to you in your day Michael.*
Hi Tina, I just read your two poems and the above prose piece. The former two seem to suggest that it is possible to delve below the surfaces of life and find something more nourishing than our ordinary superficial engagements. The latter talks more about suffering and how we can learn from it. (Hope I am not too ruthlessly summarizing the richer wholeness or your writing). I do so in order to have a basis for asking a question, which this chapter presents: given that we can only “know” surfaces, is there a way to engage experience/appearance/field communique that is not so bound to knowledge of the surface? My understanding of the text is that the approach suggested is not so much to penetrate the surface (since our ways of “knowing” merely expose new surfaces), but to intuit a space that animates both the surface of appearance and the mind called forth to experience that appearance. I’m not exactly sure how to do that, but I take the wind’s word for it that it can be done. –Michael