Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

5656Re: Concentration, Absorbtion and Meditation / Tony

Expand Messages
  • dan330033
    Apr 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, asimpjoy
      <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > Popular methods for quieting the mind.
      > Concentration:
      > This is when I force myself to pay attention to a particular
      > ... And when I concentrate on something in this way I must exclude
      > other things, because I have the motive of achieving a desired
      > This means I must suppress whatever interferes with what I am
      > to concentrate on.
      > Absorption:
      > This is when my mind is absorbed by an object so completely that
      > it consumes my total attention, and as long as the object absorbs
      > attention I will have forgotten myself.
      > ... But, like the child who is temporarily pacified with a toy,
      > when the toy is taken away it is thrown back on to itself again,
      > and so it then returns to its same old mischief.
      > Meditation:
      > Here the mind is only passively aware. There is no motive, no
      > no exclusion. It simply observes whatever is present - it is
      > inclusive!
      > It seems that only the passive awareness of selfless observation
      > actually eliminate the egotistical observer, and thereby allow the
      > mind to enter a dimension of unselfconscious Silence.
      > ... And it appears that only the dimension of pure Awareness can
      > bring about an authentic action of spontaneous Compassion.
      > With love and affection,
      > Tony

      Thanks, Tony, for these thoughtful, clear explanations.

      It makes sense that if I'm absorbed in something,
      I can lose that absorption if I lose that something.

      Unless that in which I'm being absorbed isn't an object,
      is what has been called Self or God.

      Yet, to the extent that absorption is an experience, it begins
      at some point -- and what has a beginning, has an ending.

      The same recognition can be applied to meditation -- if I
      begin at some point to experience the passive awareness
      you describe, then that experience will have an end.

      For example, it could end with the experience of active

      Or you may mean by "passive awareness" that awareness which
      begins and ends not, in and through which all that is, is known.

      Beginning not would mean not having a recognizable experience
      of some sort associated, as all experiences equally
      arise and fall within "this" which is never itself

      Recognizing this, we can differentiate experiential
      meditational states, from nonexperiential truth,
      meditation as the very awareness in which all arises
      now, subsides, now.

      Still, there is the relationship of "this" to experience,
      to phenomena to comprehend.

      One is this relationship, which is at once the totality
      of all relationship possibilities, and no relationship
      at all.

      As nonseparable awareness, I include all relationship,
      all phenomena. And yet, I am not in relationship,
      as there is no separable beings or things with which
      I could be in relationship, or which could be
      in relationship with me.

      When beings speak of a "relationship with God," they
      are then speaking of separable qualities and beings,
      all arising and subsiding in "this" which therefore
      is beyond a God of relationship,
      beyond being, and beyond beings --
      yet from which no being is ever apart -- even
      for a second.

      This is timeless meditation, beyond passive awareness or
      active awareness, even beyond any such quality as
      awareness which could be contrasted with nonawareness.

    • Show all 5 messages in this topic