|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 22, 2020 12:43:13 GMT -5
from the book "I Am That" M: You are completely free even now. What you call destiny (karma) is but the result of your own will to live. How strong is this will you can judge by the universal horror of death. Q: People die willingly quite often. M: Only when the alternative is worse than death. But such readiness to die flows from the same source as the will to live, a source deeper even than life itself. To be a living being is not the ultimate state; there is something beyond, much more wonderful, which is neither being nor non-being, neither living nor not-living. It is a state of pure awareness, beyond the limitations of space and time. Once the illusion that the body-mind is oneself is abandoned, death loses its terror, it becomes a part of living. That's fascinating, thanks for that. For me, kamma is the other piece of the puzzle in all this, although what's interesting is the Buddha outright stated, "kamma is intent".
Fascinating line, I wasn't familiar with.
I shall ponder this. Thank you. You're welcome. :-)
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 22, 2020 12:47:41 GMT -5
I'm not sure. In nirvikalpa samadhi there is pure awareness without thought or perception. In that state the word "consciousness" does not seem applicable because there is nothing to be conscious of. I suspect that Franklin M-W used the phrase "consciousness without an object" to mean consciousness without distinction, or what I refer to as "ATA-T;" there is seeing of "what is" without name or ideation. One is conscious because "what is" is seen, but "what is" is not dualistically distinguished. In NS nothing is seen, but in wakeful consciousness "what is" is seen. I don't know whether this makes sense because what's being pointed to is a bit hard to communicate. The question that immediately springs to mind is whether such a state is subject to the sleep cycle, or if not, how long could one dwell in such a state. Also, if "what is" is seen, then isn't that regarded at some degree of 'content' going on, in which case the need to sleep would likely still be applicable at some stage. I remember reading (paraphrasing) that having achieved the state of nirvana, and thereby purging consciousness of the mundane perturbations of mind, the Buddha required relatively little sleep. Yet sleep was still required nonetheless. (Although this isn't to say he was permanently dwelling in NS.) But SS for example must involve a degree of content. And presumably SS is regarded at still being subject to a sleep cycle. Why?? …. if it were a state of unequivocal effortlessness. NS is not subject to the sleep cycle. It is a state of pure awareness with no content at all. Nothing is seen, heard, felt, etc, and no thoughts are present. Zen people call it "the falling off of body and mind." Meditators commonly enter that state for a period ranging from thirty minutes to several hours, but rarely longer than a day. It is an extremely blissful state of total emptiness, but virtually nothing can be said about it because there is nothing describable about it. Upon entering that state the meditator can feel an internal process of unification that occurs as everthing sensible coalesces into a state of empty unity. SS is different because the world is seen as well as thoughts, and it is subject to a sleep cycle.
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Jun 22, 2020 12:50:34 GMT -5
Now that one smacks of fake Buddha quote! Can't imagine the Buddha spent much time wishing for things that weren't possible. At best, perhaps a clumsy paraphrase. I read that quote very long back. By the way do you understand that quote? he says he is aware even when he sleeps!
Apologies, no, I didn't get that from it. But it's something I can relate to (as mentioned before with E and his alarm clock).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 13:00:50 GMT -5
I read that quote very long back. By the way do you understand that quote? he says he is aware even when he sleeps!
Apologies, no, I didn't get that from it. But it's something I can relate to (as mentioned before with E and his alarm clock). No, That's different. Enigma was saying that he could wake up exactly at the specified time which he decides before he goes to sleep. For an example, when he goes to bed, he decides to wake up at 5, then he would wake up at 5 without anybody's intervention or even without the help of the alarm. This must have happened to everyone, I hope you must have undergone that same situation, yes?
but justlikeyou Quote about Maharaj is different which implies Maharaj is conscious even when he sleeps, his consciousness continues. More clearly put, when he dreams, he knows he dreams, when wake up, he knows he is in reality, when he enter into the deep sleep , he knows he is in deep sleep. That's the same with Buddha when he explains to his brother, If he wish to moves his lips, he could because he is conscious !
But whether these guys are telling the truth or not I don't know. But that's what these guys are saying! I find it's quite interesting.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 22, 2020 13:08:54 GMT -5
Now that one smacks of fake Buddha quote! Can't imagine the Buddha spent much time wishing for things that weren't possible. At best, perhaps a clumsy paraphrase. I read that quote very long back. By the way do you understand that quote? he says he is aware even when he sleeps!
Yes. Several Zen Masters have made this same claim. Here's another interesting quote from Sengstan, the third patriarch of Zen: "If the eye never sleeps, all dreams will naturally cease. If the mind makes no discriminations, the ten thousand things are as they are, of single essence. To understand the mystery of this One-essence is to be released from all entanglements. When all things are seen equally the timeless Self-essence is reached. No comparisons or analogies are possible in this causeless, relationless state."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2020 13:20:14 GMT -5
I read that quote very long back. By the way do you understand that quote? he says he is aware even when he sleeps!
Yes. Several Zen Masters have made this same claim. Here's another interesting quote from Sengstan, the third patriarch of Zen: "If the eye never sleeps, all dreams will naturally cease. If the mind makes no discriminations, the ten thousand things are as they are, of single essence. To understand the mystery of this One-essence is to be released from all entanglements. When all things are seen equally the timeless Self-essence is reached. No comparisons or analogies are possible in this causeless, relationless state." Thank you for placing this quote. But still I liked this line very much " Segal: p53, "In sleep, the mind finally stopped pumping out its unceasing litany of terror, and the witness was left to witness an unconscious mind"
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Jun 22, 2020 13:58:03 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure what I'm pointing to either yet hehe, but I often see folks on these forums talking about how after SR, life becomes totally effortless, and when it comes up I find it's not something I agree with for the reasons touched upon in the OP. Yesterday I heard a story about a swan who was nursing a clutch of eggs. The story went that some boys came along and threw bricks at the eggs and destroyed them. Subsequently the swans partner left her, and a few days later she died. The locals concluded she died of a broken heart. Sure there may have been more to that particular tale, but regardless, I do believe in the capacity to die from a broken heart, or 'lose the will to live'. Most people will be familiar with accounts of old couples who have been together many years, and when one falls of their horse, the other is broken and follows shortly after. Additionally, I've noted before that in the face of adversity, less complex organisms seem even more disposed to simply 'give up the ghost'. Anyway, after hearing the story I was moved to throw up a post and just see where it goes. The premise is, if one can simply lose the will to live, then does that not suggest that to some extent 'will' underpins corporeal experience itself … I put a thread up some time back posing the question whether intent is something that happens on a purely conscious level. Don't think it got a lot of traction, but it seems fairly obvious to me that it's a phenomenon that runs much deeper than that. I guess will, effort, and intent, are all much-a-much, and this is about exploring that a little. To what extent it pervades, and perhaps underpins, corporeality. My contention is that it's to a far greater extent than is generally acknowledged. My take on this is somewhat different, but that may be because this particular character was always a bit like Peter Pan. haha. I always had extremely strong interests, and my parents supported those interests and gave me enormous freedom. This allowed me to "follow my bliss," and primarily only do things that I found to be fun. Over the years I watched as interests shifted from one thing to another, and I noticed that many things I felt like doing were almost compulsive in nature and not based on anything logical or predictable. Many interests and compulsions seemed to come from out of the blue. I never questioned changes in interests or compulsive non-rational actions; I just did whatever I felt drawn to do. For almost forty years I had very little interest in money, so I never became "mature" in the way that adults typically do as a result of cultural indoctrination. I started meditating at the age of forty only because I lost my peace of mind due to incessant thinking, and after encountering a small book that suggested peace of mind could be gained via meditation. Shortly after starting to shift attention away from thoughts to direct sensory perception, I started having realizations, fell into deep states of non-dual samadhi, and then had a mind-blowing CC. Until that happened I assumed that my search for answers to existential questions (a primary interest) would eventually be answered via scientific insights into reality, but after the CC, I lost interest in the intellect as a source of existential understanding and became laser-focused on "getting out of my head," "looking within," and becoming sufficiently silent for answers to existential questions to appear. As the internal dialogue diminished, and there were sustained periods of silence, it became increasingly obvious that whatever the body does is exactly like blood cells moving through veins and arteries going wherever they need to go. IOW, it was seen that what we call "reality" is incomprehensibly intelligent and is functioning primarily below the level of conscious awareness. After the illusion of being an SVP collapsed, words like "intent," "motivation," "will," "effort," etc. all collapsed into a state of unified suchness, and the organism simply continued doing what it had always done but without the kind of intellectual overlay that had been dominant in the past. Life then felt like floating down a river on a raft and letting the current carry the raft in whatever direction it moved. This outlook is not in opposition to the fact that some people seem to lose "their will to live." That, too, is just the way that the Infinite manifests as human beings. Thank you for sharing. My position is, the desire to label might have dissipated, but that isn't to say the movement to which the labels point isn't still present. In fact movement is a good phrase. Movement is certainly synonymous with content, but is it synonymous with, say, the … "what is" that is seen .. , in NS, to which you previously referred. I say it is (albeit in it's subtlest form), and that, that movement itself is underpinned by what those labels point to. That essentially they are the same!
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Jun 22, 2020 14:03:31 GMT -5
The question that immediately springs to mind is whether such a state is subject to the sleep cycle, or if not, how long could one dwell in such a state. Also, if "what is" is seen, then isn't that regarded at some degree of 'content' going on, in which case the need to sleep would likely still be applicable at some stage. I remember reading (paraphrasing) that having achieved the state of nirvana, and thereby purging consciousness of the mundane perturbations of mind, the Buddha required relatively little sleep. Yet sleep was still required nonetheless. (Although this isn't to say he was permanently dwelling in NS.) But SS for example must involve a degree of content. And presumably SS is regarded at still being subject to a sleep cycle. Why?? …. if it were a state of unequivocal effortlessness. NS is not subject to the sleep cycle. It is a state of pure awareness with no content at all. Nothing is seen, heard, felt, etc, and no thoughts are present. Zen people call it "the falling off of body and mind." Meditators commonly enter that state for a period ranging from thirty minutes to several hours, but rarely longer than a day. It is an extremely blissful state of total emptiness, but virtually nothing can be said about it because there is nothing describable about it. Upon entering that state the meditator can feel an internal process of unification that occurs as everthing sensible coalesces into a state of empty unity. SS is different because the world is seen as well as thoughts, and it is subject to a sleep cycle. Okay thanks, I was trying to ascertain if NS could be sustained indefinitely without the need for sleep, thereby qualifying as effortless. I'm familiar with the state, the Buddhists have a comparable state known as nirodha-samapatti - the cessation of perception and feeling (sometimes known as the tenth jhana). It's a tad down from paranibbana - total unbinding, 'the end of rebirth' and also is still classed as a temporary state. (In which case I'm still classing it as technically subject to the sleep cycle, and by extension underpinned by some form of effort, however subtle). You didn’t answer my direct question about how SS could be classed as an effortless state, but under the circumstances it was largely rhetorical anyway.
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Jun 22, 2020 14:06:18 GMT -5
Apologies, no, I didn't get that from it. But it's something I can relate to (as mentioned before with E and his alarm clock). No, That's different. Enigma was saying that he could wake up exactly at the specified time which he decides before he goes to sleep. For an example, when he goes to bed, he decides to wake up at 5, then he would wake up at 5 without anybody's intervention or even without the help of the alarm. This must have happened to everyone, I hope you must have undergone that same situation, yes?
but justlikeyou Quote about Maharaj is different which implies Maharaj is conscious even when he sleeps, his consciousness continues. More clearly put, when he dreams, he knows he dreams, when wake up, he knows he is in reality, when he enter into the deep sleep , he knows he is in deep sleep. That's the same with Buddha when he explains to his brother, If he wish to moves his lips, he could because he is conscious !
But whether these guys are telling the truth or not I don't know. But that's what these guys are saying! I find it's quite interesting.
It's essentially the same point … i.e. in order to wake at a specific time without an alarm clock, there must be a degree of conscious awareness going on within the sleep state. I understand that can be extended to deep sleep and dreaming as well, and am familiar with that too.
It's very interesting! ... (it comes through 'being present').
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 22, 2020 14:18:38 GMT -5
NS is not subject to the sleep cycle. It is a state of pure awareness with no content at all. Nothing is seen, heard, felt, etc, and no thoughts are present. Zen people call it "the falling off of body and mind." Meditators commonly enter that state for a period ranging from thirty minutes to several hours, but rarely longer than a day. It is an extremely blissful state of total emptiness, but virtually nothing can be said about it because there is nothing describable about it. Upon entering that state the meditator can feel an internal process of unification that occurs as everthing sensible coalesces into a state of empty unity. SS is different because the world is seen as well as thoughts, and it is subject to a sleep cycle. You didn’t answer my direct question about how SS could be classed as an effortless state, but under the circumstances it was largely rhetorical anyway. We covered that issue in the thread about the difference between Advaita and Neo-Advaita. Reefs put up some quotes by Waite and some definitions. "Samadhi sthiti" is a more technically-accurate term than "sahaja samadhi," but both terms are pointing to a stateless state that is effortless. The Tao Te Ching points to this way of life in several ways, but the quote that comes to mind at the moment is something like, "the sage does nothing but everything gets done." Waite points out that SS is not really a state because it's a permanent way of being. Ramana said to one seeker, "Nirvikalpa samadhi is the deepest, but sahaja samadhi is the highest." I suspect that he said that because NS is transient and temporary but SS is not. SS does not occur until the Infinite realizes Itself.
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Jun 22, 2020 15:05:52 GMT -5
You didn’t answer my direct question about how SS could be classed as an effortless state, but under the circumstances it was largely rhetorical anyway. We covered that issue in the thread about the difference between Advaita and Neo-Advaita. Reefs put up some quotes by Waite and some definitions. "Samadhi sthiti" is a more technically-accurate term than "sahaja samadhi," but both terms are pointing to a stateless state that is effortless. The Tao Te Ching points to this way of life in several ways, but the quote that comes to mind at the moment is something like, " the sage does nothing but everything gets done." Waite points out that SS is not really a state because it's a permanent way of being. Okay, sorry, I didn't follow that one too closely, but it sounds interesting so I'll have a scout back. I'm sure it's clear my opinion is that the phrase 'effortless' is being misapplied in that instance. The best I'd go is relatively effortless.
I interpret that as saying 'although there is no doer, there is still doing'. Compatible enough with my position.
Additionally I would tend to classify SS as a state, which I apply to anything that is synonymous with the conditioned, (or content). But that’s not important. Yes, I'd agree with that. From what I can tell SS seems to be more akin to what's pointed to by Nirvana, or 'unbound'. Coming through penetrating insight, and resulting in the falling away of delusion and subsequent baggage.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 22, 2020 23:52:31 GMT -5
Perhaps we might say, that one pattern of the way appearances tend to appear, is that they're entropic. Absolutely. No problem, (I don’t remember us having the conversation), but my understanding is that fire as a simile is one the Buddha often used, and there are many references to it throughout the suttas. For example, the Buddha specifically referred to the attainment of the state of nirvana as 'like a fire going out'. But in this instance the one that springs to mind would be Adittapariyaya Sutta: The Fire Sermon, where he begins by stating " the All is aflame". 'The All' is most definitely analogous to what we conceive of as the world. So, not a fake quote. Thanks, well worth the read, and I don't recall seeing that before. To my eye, effortlessness is implicated by "full release". This doesn't mean that flowers stop giving off scent, or that the eye remains closed, or the mind a blank, with no "contact" giving rise to a process of thinking. But it does mean that the old trance is not only broken, but that it can't ever deceive again. The swan story is beautiful, and, (2nd use today ) deeply poignant. We can relate this to "full release" by the fact that "full release" isn't incompatible with earthly love. In fact, the sort of sorrow you alluded to is a kind of negative-outline of the shadow of the truth of existential emptiness. Each moment dazzles in it's uniqueness, excruciatingly so, always dying to the next, never to happen exactly the same more than once. When earthly love is unconditional, it captures eternity in a bottle, so, just as pain is distinct from suffering, grief can be distinct, from despair.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 22, 2020 23:56:26 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure what you're pointing to, but I like Nisargadatta's take on this issue. He said, "Awareness is primordial; it is the original state, beginningless, endless, uncaused, unsupported, without parts, without change. Consciousness is on contact, a reflection against a surface, a state of duality. There can be no consciousness without awareness, but there can be awareness without consciousness. Awareness is absolute, consciousness is relative to its content; consciousness is always of something." I'm not quite sure what I'm pointing to either yet hehe, but I often see folks on these forums talking about how after SR, life becomes totally effortless, and when it comes up I find it's not something I agree with for the reasons touched upon in the OP. Yesterday I heard a sad story about a swan who was nursing a clutch of eggs. The story went that some boys came along and threw bricks at the eggs and destroyed them. Subsequently the swans partner left her, and a few days later she died. The locals concluded she died of a broken heart. Sure there may have been more to that particular tale, but regardless, I do believe in the capacity to die from a broken heart, or 'lose the will to live'. Most people will be familiar with accounts of old couples who have been together many years, and when one falls of their horse, the other is broken and follows shortly after. Additionally, I've noted before that in the face of adversity, less complex organisms seem even more disposed to simply 'give up the ghost'. Anyway, after hearing the story I was moved to throw up a post and just see where it goes. The premise is, if one can simply lose the will to live, then does that not suggest that to some extent 'will' underpins corporeal experience itself … I put a thread up some time back posing the question whether intent is something that happens on a purely conscious level. Don't think it got a lot of traction, but it seems fairly obvious to me that it's a phenomenon that runs much deeper than that. I guess will, effort, and intent, are all much-a-much, and this is about exploring that a little. To what extent i t pervades, and perhaps even underpins, corporeality. My contention is that it's to a far greater extent than is generally acknowledged. (** frowns and wags finger **)
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 23, 2020 0:18:17 GMT -5
No, That's different. Enigma was saying that he could wake up exactly at the specified time which he decides before he goes to sleep. For an example, when he goes to bed, he decides to wake up at 5, then he would wake up at 5 without anybody's intervention or even without the help of the alarm. This must have happened to everyone, I hope you must have undergone that same situation, yes?
but justlikeyou Quote about Maharaj is different which implies Maharaj is conscious even when he sleeps, his consciousness continues. More clearly put, when he dreams, he knows he dreams, when wake up, he knows he is in reality, when he enter into the deep sleep , he knows he is in deep sleep. That's the same with Buddha when he explains to his brother, If he wish to moves his lips, he could because he is conscious !
But whether these guys are telling the truth or not I don't know. But that's what these guys are saying! I find it's quite interesting.
It's essentially the same point … i.e. in order to wake at a specific time without an alarm clock, there must be a degree of conscious awareness going on within the sleep state. I understand that can be extended to deep sleep and dreaming as well, and am familiar with that too.
It's very interesting! ... (it comes through 'being present').
heh heh .. I've had it happen not by being present, but the opposite of pumping up the fear and panic trance the night before, and yet somehow, inexplicably, getting to sleep anyways with less that 5 or 6 hours to go. Essentially, I woke up a few minutes before the alarm went off out of terror that I'd sleep through it.
|
|
|
Post by shadowplay on Jun 23, 2020 8:54:49 GMT -5
Yes. Several Zen Masters have made this same claim. Here's another interesting quote from Sengstan, the third patriarch of Zen: "If the eye never sleeps, all dreams will naturally cease. If the mind makes no discriminations, the ten thousand things are as they are, of single essence. To understand the mystery of this One-essence is to be released from all entanglements. When all things are seen equally the timeless Self-essence is reached. No comparisons or analogies are possible in this causeless, relationless state." Thank you for placing this quote. But still I liked this line very much " Segal: p53, "In sleep, the mind finally stopped pumping out its unceasing litany of terror, and the witness was left to witness an unconscious mind"
I struggle to find credibility in such claims. If there were such a wide-awake witness throughout deep sleep - which ‘transcends mental states’ - why on earth would it have ANY connection (or association, or relationship) to a particular body-mind unit? Think about it. If the mind/identity has been left behind in deep sleep why would there be a transcendent witness of the contents or circumstances of THAT particular mind? Why would it hang about watching the unconscious body at rest (as opposed to all manner of alternative possibilities)? The reason why is surely because it is still within the sphere of that particular body-mind - albeit in a very subtle state of cognition. In other words, the mind is not really asleep.
I find it far more credible to understand such claims/assertions as a confirmation of the fact that in deep sleep ’something’ is still very much operative - a deep intelligence remains at work which is ultimately is beyond the limited cognition of ordinary waking intellect and sensory perception. This deep intelligence transcends - and is the ground of - all states.
|
|