|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 1, 2016 4:20:54 GMT -5
The only difference between bhakti and jnani is the type of duality involved. To the bhakti, there is him, and there is God. To the jnani, there is him, and there is the truth. The paths appear to move in opposite directions but this only seems that way to those walking the paths, and most of the silly disputes and long-running animosities out on the forum are from would-be bhakti's objecting to suggestions to follow the path of insight and reports from the end of that path. The jnani negates. His is the path of "neti-neti". While the bhakti prays, the janani sits quietly in meditation, the purest form that I'm familiar with being Zen "shikantaza", of which Adyashanti's "True Meditation" is sort of a kind of a form of sort of made soft for a broad audience.  While the bhakti strives to remain ever grateful, the task of the jnani is to maintain an attitude to what arises that is ever curious and attentive. The bhakti path, is the path of "yes", the path of surrender. The jnani, on the other hand says "no", as he rejects any and all conclusions or associations in "form" (as in maya, stuff, thought, emotion etc) as irrelevant to the question of what he is, for he accepts, at least intellectually, that all that arises to and recedes from him, is not what he is. But you see these movements are, at core, the same. The sincere jnani, in his curiosity, explores the nature of his own objections to wisdom openly, and with a doubt in his mind that is so total, so complete, and so all encompassing of his senses and his interpretation of them, that it leaves no room for conclusions of intellect or emotion. His "no" is not a refusal that is a limitation, but rather, the refusal of the inherent limitation that is mind, in and of itself. The discernment that is called for is not that of dividing truth from fiction, but rather that of discerning the nature of the divide, as it is, as it arises, as it recedes. This is simply seeing the false as false, as the truth is not ultimately available by the power of discernment. This seeing the false as false, is the lifting of the veil of illusion. As Billy Shakes put it, "there is no good nor bad but that thinking makes it so". All jnani discover somewhere along the way that everyone creates their own Denmark with their conditioned thoughts and feelings. But it's not for the material pleasure, gain or simple relief of this discovery that the path is offered. Just as a sincere bhakti doesn't pray to God for material well-being, any benefits gained for the jnani by his insight are recognized as by-products that are worthless in the shadow of the truth. Just as the earnest bhakti knows that God will provide, the self-honest jnani isn't tempted by anything other than the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. His restlessness might subside for a time, but it's always there, underneath the surface, even if he's not conscious of it. My experience was of neither pure bhakti nor pure janani and in my opinion these are ultimately just archetypes used for the convenience of the peeps who, in the past, have taught and organized the scriptures. Like any other conceptual structure, they're prone to misuse. In Europe, and later America, the split was so bad that for hundreds of years the only form of spirituality available in any organized sense was bhakti. But the fact is that almost everyone has a sense of the nature of devotion, of something greater, something higher, something worthy of love, devotion and sacrifice. And almost everyone also has a sense that there is some truth that might be discerned in some way if only that way could be made clear and their energies applied to it in earnest. There is no reason to reject God in order to embrace the truth -- every bhakti who perfects their love cannot then fail to discern that truth, and true insight cannot help but drop the janani to their knees. At the end of either path, the thinking as to good or bad will continue, but will never again run away with itself. All is sacred, and it is only ever thinking or feeling that makes it either good or bad, but this thinking or feeling never makes this any less sacred. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2016 17:45:11 GMT -5
The only difference between bhakti and jnani is the type of duality involved. To the bhakti, there is him, and there is God. To the jnani, there is him, and there is the truth. The paths appear to move in opposite directions but this only seems that way to those walking the paths, and most of the silly disputes and long-running animosities out on the forum are from would-be bhakti's objecting to suggestions to follow the path of insight and reports from the end of that path. The jnani negates. His is the path of "neti-neti". While the bhakti prays, the janani sits quietly in meditation, the purest form that I'm familiar with being Zen "shikantaza", of which Adyashanti's "True Meditation" is sort of a kind of a form of sort of made soft for a broad audience. While the bhakti strives to remain ever grateful, the task of the jnani is to maintain an attitude to what arises that is ever curious and attentive. The bhakti path, is the path of "yes", the path of surrender. The jnani, on the other hand says "no", as he rejects any and all conclusions or associations in "form" (as in maya, stuff, thought, emotion etc) as irrelevant to the question of what he is, for he accepts, at least intellectually, that all that arises to and recedes from him, is not what he is. But you see these movements are, at core, the same. The sincere jnani, in his curiosity, explores the nature of his own objections to wisdom openly, and with a doubt in his mind that is so total, so complete, and so all encompassing of his senses and his interpretation of them, that it leaves no room for conclusions of intellect or emotion. His "no" is not a refusal that is a limitation, but rather, the refusal of the inherent limitation that is mind, in and of itself. The discernment that is called for is not that of dividing truth from fiction, but rather that of discerning the nature of the divide, as it is, as it arises, as it recedes. This is simply seeing the false as false, as the truth is not ultimately available by the power of discernment. This seeing the false as false, is the lifting of the veil of illusion. As Billy Shakes put it, "there is no good nor bad but that thinking makes it so". All jnani discover somewhere along the way that everyone creates their own Denmark with their conditioned thoughts and feelings. But it's not for the material pleasure, gain or simple relief of this discovery that the path is offered. Just as a sincere bhakti doesn't pray to God for material well-being, any benefits gained for the jnani by his insight are recognized as by-products that are worthless in the shadow of the truth. Just as the earnest bhakti knows that God will provide, the self-honest jnani isn't tempted by anything other than the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. His restlessness might subside for a time, but it's always there, underneath the surface, even if he's not conscious of it. My experience was of neither pure bhakti nor pure jnani and in my opinion these are ultimately just archetypes used for the convenience of the peeps who, in the past, have taught and organized the scriptures. Like any other conceptual structure, they're prone to misuse. In Europe, and later America, the split was so bad that for hundreds of years the only form of spirituality available in any organized sense was bhakti. But the fact is that almost everyone has a sense of the nature of devotion, of something greater, something higher, something worthy of love, devotion and sacrifice. And almost everyone also has a sense that there is some truth that might be discerned in some way if only that way could be made clear and their energies applied to it in earnest. There is no reason to reject God in order to embrace the truth -- every bhakti who perfects their love cannot then fail to discern that truth, and true insight cannot help but drop the jnani to their knees. At the end of either path, the thinking as to good or bad will continue, but will never again run away with itself. All is sacred, and it is only ever thinking or feeling that makes it either good or bad, but this thinking or feeling never makes this any less sacred. Thanks for the suggestion that there's most likely an innate affinity for either one. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 9, 2016 1:18:05 GMT -5
My pleasure, yes, of course. Recognizing the patterns around us can be fun and useful in all sorts of ways. Some of those involve natural phenomena like weather, water, trees, fauna and sunlight. Others involve peeps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2016 1:54:52 GMT -5
Are you enlightened laughter?
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 9, 2016 9:04:16 GMT -5
Are you enlightened laughter? From reading your contribution here over the years I have an idea of what you mean by that. Based on that understanding my answer is no, it's unlikely that I am in the way you think of it. How about you, are you enlightened? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2016 9:24:58 GMT -5
Are you enlightened laughter? From reading your contribution here over the years I have an idea of what you mean by that. Based on that understanding my answer is no, it's unlikely that I am in the way you think of it. How about you, are you enlightened? what's the hold up, slacker  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 9, 2016 9:27:23 GMT -5
From reading your contribution here over the years I have an idea of what you mean by that. Based on that understanding my answer is no, it's unlikely that I am in the way you think of it. How about you, are you enlightened? what's the hold up, slacker .. too tired and jaded from all my impure comings, goings, doings and lack of effort ..  |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 9, 2016 9:46:45 GMT -5
Ultimately each of the so called path's are the same. In the end the bhakta and the jnani are on the same level of insight anyway. They just came from different directions. The so called jnani came to the conclusion that ultimately only Love matters, to which the bhakta would say, "I knew that all along, dude." And the bhakta comes to the conclusion that thinking for him or herself is very very helpfull in solving existential problems, to which the jnani would say, "I knew that all along, honey."
And actually there is no path. There is only either one follows ones true nature or not. And if not, one suffers from not being true to oneself. What matters in the very end is: Have I been true to myself, my true nature, or not.
That's all.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 9, 2016 10:27:37 GMT -5
Ultimately each of the so called path's are the same. In the end the bhakta and the jnani are on the same level of insight anyway. They just came from different directions. The so called jnani came to the conclusion that ultimately only Love matters, to which the bhakta would say, "I knew that all along, dude." And the bhakta comes to the conclusion that thinking for him or herself is very very helpfull in solving existential problems, to which the jnani would say, "I knew that all along, honey." And actually there is no path. There is only either one follows ones true nature or not. And if not, one suffers from not being true to oneself. What matters in the very end is: Have I been true to myself, my true nature, or not. That's all. Pretty well said, thanks, but I think the bhakta's final conclusion is a bit different from that. |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 9, 2016 10:35:36 GMT -5
No, it isn't. The bhakta lacked proper thinking skills. That's why he or she was a bhakta in the first place.
Prove me wrong, Laughter, if you can.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 9, 2016 10:47:21 GMT -5
No, it isn't. The bhakta lacked proper thinking skills. That's why he or she was a bhakta in the first place. Prove me wrong, Laughter, if you can. Sorry, got no interest in that. |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 9, 2016 11:01:18 GMT -5
Good! That's what I expected from you!...(smirking like an idiot...)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2016 20:00:27 GMT -5
Are you enlightened laughter? From reading your contribution here over the years I have an idea of what you mean by that. Based on that understanding my answer is no, it's unlikely that I am in the way you think of it. How about you, are you enlightened? bugger I just lost my response to your most interesting post. I have trouble working this new computer; everything is so fast. Nope, me's not at all enlightened, cept if I meet a real person;at that moment I am ablaze. |
|
|
|
Post by anja on Jun 10, 2016 13:23:25 GMT -5
Alfio, I think you're enlightened. The sun is shinning right now, I hope. And Laughter is enlightened also...because I say so. But unfortunately I'm just...well...when spiritual people meet me in person, they just think, "she's not even wearing cowboy-boots!"
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 6, 2019 11:45:07 GMT -5
Certainly. But as I said, different people see different things in these books, depending on their personal background. My background is similar to Tano's - no religious or spiritual education. In my teens and later in college/university I thought that was somehow a disadvantage because I had nothing to rely on, but from my now perspective, it's been a blessing, nothing (or not much) to deconstruct and basically no drama/trauma in that regard. I think you mentioned once that you had a rather strict religious background. So to you Jed's point about traditions may seem a lot more important than it does to me. I was raised catholic, but never bought into it....and it always baffled me how grown adults, including my own parents, somehow had. So there really wasn't much to deconstruct...if anything, the seeing of how intelligent people could be bamboozled in that way had me seeing pretty early on, the depth of mind's shenanigans.  love it. (.. I remember some of the stories you wrote about that in the past ..) |
|
While the bhakti strives to remain ever grateful, the task of the jnani is to maintain an attitude to what arises that is ever curious and attentive. The bhakti path, is the path of "yes", the path of surrender. The jnani, on the other hand says "no", as he rejects any and all conclusions or associations in "form" (as in maya, stuff, thought, emotion etc) as irrelevant to the question of what he is, for he accepts, at least intellectually, that all that arises to and recedes from him, is not what he is.
love it.