Something a teacher taught a while ago, which I might start using more deliberately to interrogate my thinking. I thought I would tweet it on the off change that I get any interesting/helpful comments back re: questioning signifiers. (Comments/suggestions welcome, as always)
-
Show this thread
-
”When someone repeatedly uses a word/phrase as a signifier it’s probably helpful to question that term, and look at our reaction to the usage. What do I/they mean?” • what do I think x means? • what do I associate x with? • how are they using x? • idiosyncratic? technical?
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likesShow this thread -
Meditation eg/s: • I know a dzogchenpa who uses ‘Truth’ in a way unlike my associations with the word. Took me ages to look at that, notice how it changed my perception of what they said. • Shinzen refers to The Source. I’m still not sure what he means. • ‘Awakening’
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
-
Replying to @chagmed
In a way which is synonymous with primordial ground in Dzogchen, & perhaps the way Mipham uses coalescence. Something like: empty/spontaneous dynamic of — essence/nature/capacity — mind; which is not static but dynamic, not without pattern, both manifest and non-manifest.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I was misunderstanding how 'truth' was being used — such that it sounded eternalistic & dead to me — but once I actually questioned that, my impression of their way of teaching opened up in more interesting & helpful ways. Seems that open questioning offers threads to pull on.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
This is all run-off from my ongoing interest in organising & expressing my thoughts more clearly, as we briefly chatted about the other day.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.