|
Post by sree on Sept 5, 2022 15:02:42 GMT -5
Do you talk to your wife the way you are conversing with me now? That would be one heck of a relationship. I recall reading Krishnamurti musing about himself having such a relationship. Wouldn’t that be simply magic: two minds communing at the same time, at the same level, with the same intensity? I am not saying that you and I are in love, but you get the point. Right? The oneness of humanity is not a fanciful dream. It is an attainable state. Imagine the power we can harness to wipe out insecurity, anxiety, and fear in the human consciousness. The transformation of our world would be as effortless as the melting of snow in the warmth of the sun.
This conversation of ours could take place between the US President and the President of Russia. If those two guys were you and I, do you think we can agree to disarm, get rid of nuclear weapons and our military forces? China would come along because they need a stable world to grow their economy and lift more of their people out of poverty. What is the possibility of this wishful thinking becoming real? It would be like a 1 in 300 million chance of winning a Mega million lottery. And yet, millions of people bet on it day after day. And someone does win! Why won’t we make a more worthwhile bet on changing our world for the better for all mankind? If we channel our psychic energy in this direction, we have a chance to win this existential jackpot. Krishnamurti is dead and gone. I am just one guy in this world now making this bet. lol yes, we've done a ton of spiritual talk over the years, we met each other on a spiritual forum in fact. We come from slightly different points on the spiritual spectrum, so whereas she inspires me to dream and create, I'm more boring, and offer groundedness. I guess we are a pretty good balance for each other. I share your view of humanity's potential, I spend time around new age people, and believe that we are actually on the precipice of change right now. My family are a big driving force for me, I want better for them (and me) than this world has had to offer. But in a sense, I don't feel like this change is a 'special' change, it's more of a natural sane change, like returning fish to water. It's the crazy way the world has been, that is extraordinary. If you still want to answer the first questions I asked...you'd be very welcome....? Would you say you and your wife are twin-flames? Psychology Today, using the reason of science, has scuttled the traditional definition of man and woman. Consequently, a relationship for a western man or woman is driven by reason and lacks the spirituality that had inspired great Chinese love stories. "The Butterfly Lovers" comes to mind. No carnality. Pure spiritual bonding. Zhang Yimou managed to portray this quality in this movie:
|
|
|
Post by sree on Sept 5, 2022 19:20:05 GMT -5
Of course, science does have its place but as our tool and not the other way round. This comes back to the question about what we are. Are we human beings living on planet earth? Science (i.e. our auto-mindset) says we are. Some guy here said that we are more than what science says. Was he on auto-pilot when he uttered that? If he was, then what he said has no value.
Are we on auto-pilot right now as we speak? I am not. I don't know where you are speaking from and it doesn't matter because earth has no place in this conversation. It does not exist. You are just a voice in my head when I read your posts.
Isn't it great that we have found a technological way (internet) to become one movement of thought? Imagine a coming together - every one of us as manifestations of formless energy guided by intelligence - working together to fulfill not just all our bodily needs but satisfy our desires living in a beautiful natural paradise.
It all begins with a dream.
If the idea that we are 'human beings living on planet earth' is a rational thought (and I agree it is), what are you in the absence of that rational thought? Are you a 'window of perception'? Are you 'formless energy'? I very much like the wording I bolded. I'll afford myself the luxury of one more question on that though....when you speak of 'bodily needs', are you saying that you believe there is a 'physicality' of sorts? We do perceive ourselves as human beings living on planet earth. This is a fact and neither an idea nor a rational thought. Our perception is informed by science. I understand how perception works and am able to dissemble the science and live in freedom of that fact. This is real liberation from being an entity (i.e. human being). The truth sets one free. One has to figure it out rationally. Not meditation. And that figuring out can be explained logically to anyone willing to examine the reasoning.
Formless energy is an idea of freedom from being a human being. I am not formless energy. I am just not a discrete human form. There is no need to become a human being or a person even if there is a need to get into role and identify as such in conventional circumstances.
Attending to bodily needs is an imperative. They are what they are. Knowledge about them has been acquired and we must attend to those needs accordingly. They are central to the mystery of life. Physicality is a concept of science.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 5, 2022 21:28:49 GMT -5
lol yes, we've done a ton of spiritual talk over the years, we met each other on a spiritual forum in fact. We come from slightly different points on the spiritual spectrum, so whereas she inspires me to dream and create, I'm more boring, and offer groundedness. I guess we are a pretty good balance for each other. I share your view of humanity's potential, I spend time around new age people, and believe that we are actually on the precipice of change right now. My family are a big driving force for me, I want better for them (and me) than this world has had to offer. But in a sense, I don't feel like this change is a 'special' change, it's more of a natural sane change, like returning fish to water. It's the crazy way the world has been, that is extraordinary. If you still want to answer the first questions I asked...you'd be very welcome....? Would you say you and your wife are twin-flames? Psychology Today, using the reason of science, has scuttled the traditional definition of man and woman. Consequently, a relationship for a western man or woman is driven by reason and lacks the spirituality that had inspired great Chinese love stories. "The Butterfly Lovers" comes to mind. No carnality. Pure spiritual bonding. Zhang Yimou managed to portray this quality in this movie: The twin-flame concept is very limiting and a tad naive. I like Abe's vibrational families concept a lot better. It's related to the streams of consciousness concept, i.e. the basic premise is that people don't incarnate as individual clumps of spirit or consciousness but as part of stream of consciousness, meaning that one and the same consciousness can express itself in more than one body. It's related to Seth's concept of families of consciousness, but the Abe version is a lot more expansive and inclusive. What this basically means in practical terms is that the people that really matter to us are the people that are part of the same stream of consciousness. It's the ones we have most in common with. Sometimes those are part of our physical family, but very often they are not. Very often our physical family is actually rather far apart from our original vibrational family and serves just as a starting or entry point into the physical. And also very often, people who belong to the same vibrational family are not on good terms at all. This is where the romantic/new-agey twin flame concept can be misleading. If both twin flame partners or members of the same vibrational family or stream of consciousness are in alignment, they will be inseparable and have a relationship made in heaven. But if one or both are out of alignment, they will still be inseparable but be more like archenemies that make each others' lives a living hell. Interesting, isn't it? So, bottom line: the people in your life that matter to you, where you have a strong, natural visceral reaction (both in the positive and negative sense) are likely the ones that belong to your vibrational family; the people that don't matter to you, where you have no visceral reaction, they likely belong to different families of consciousness.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 6, 2022 7:34:53 GMT -5
lol yes, we've done a ton of spiritual talk over the years, we met each other on a spiritual forum in fact. We come from slightly different points on the spiritual spectrum, so whereas she inspires me to dream and create, I'm more boring, and offer groundedness. I guess we are a pretty good balance for each other. I share your view of humanity's potential, I spend time around new age people, and believe that we are actually on the precipice of change right now. My family are a big driving force for me, I want better for them (and me) than this world has had to offer. But in a sense, I don't feel like this change is a 'special' change, it's more of a natural sane change, like returning fish to water. It's the crazy way the world has been, that is extraordinary. If you still want to answer the first questions I asked...you'd be very welcome....? Would you say you and your wife are twin-flames? Psychology Today, using the reason of science, has scuttled the traditional definition of man and woman. Consequently, a relationship for a western man or woman is driven by reason and lacks the spirituality that had inspired great Chinese love stories. "The Butterfly Lovers" comes to mind. No carnality. Pure spiritual bonding. Zhang Yimou managed to portray this quality in this movie: You know, that was a really great question for me to contemplate last night, it was an invitation to go within and explore the different dimensions of love. It was a very pleasing half an hour reflection. 'Twin flame' used to be (I don't know if it still is) a popular idea in new age circles. Neither me nor Jenn have been very on board with it, it's all seems a bit....'needy' at times. I seem to have come across a lot of people over the years that are mourning the absence of a being they've never even spoken to. That's not to say that I'm closed to the possibility... but I don't really consider Jenn and me to be 'twin flames', though in the early days I think I may have been a bit more drawn into the idea, simply on the basis that the love that I was feeling was so compelling, such a powerful force, and so unusual to me, that it seemed plausible. We knew we would be married before we'd even seen each other with our own eyes. We've been through a lot of challenging times in the last 15 years, and although we now have an abiding stability, it's fair to say we don't often regularly feel that immense tidal wave of love that we felt in the first period, so thanks for the question, it was a good one.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 6, 2022 7:36:20 GMT -5
Would you say you and your wife are twin-flames? Psychology Today, using the reason of science, has scuttled the traditional definition of man and woman. Consequently, a relationship for a western man or woman is driven by reason and lacks the spirituality that had inspired great Chinese love stories. "The Butterfly Lovers" comes to mind. No carnality. Pure spiritual bonding. Zhang Yimou managed to portray this quality in this movie: The twin-flame concept is very limiting and a tad naive. I like Abe's vibrational families concept a lot better. It's related to the streams of consciousness concept, i.e. the basic premise is that people don't incarnate as individual clumps of spirit or consciousness but as part of stream of consciousness, meaning that one and the same consciousness can express itself in more than one body. It's related to Seth's concept of families of consciousness, but the Abe version is a lot more expansive and inclusive. What this basically means in practical terms is that the people that really matter to us are the people that are part of the same stream of consciousness. It's the ones we have most in common with. Sometimes those are part of our physical family, but very often they are not. Very often our physical family is actually rather far apart from our original vibrational family and serves just as a starting or entry point into the physical. And also very often, people who belong to the same vibrational family are not on good terms at all. This is where the romantic/new-agey twin flame concept can be misleading. If both twin flame partners or members of the same vibrational family or stream of consciousness are in alignment, they will be inseparable and have a relationship made in heaven. But if one or both are out of alignment, they will still be inseparable but be more like archenemies that make each others' lives a living hell. Interesting, isn't it? So, bottom line: the people in your life that matter to you, where you have a strong, natural visceral reaction (both in the positive and negative sense) are likely the ones that belong to your vibrational family; the people that don't matter to you, where you have no visceral reaction, they likely belong to different families of consciousness. That's pretty resonant with me too.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 6, 2022 9:07:04 GMT -5
No, I don't remember. I read a couple of his books, I saw a lot of Cosmos, but I don't remember. Sure, I'd like to know. He said that "we are here, we have evolved into this form, so that the Universe may know itself". That's not even close to Ramana's Who am I?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 6, 2022 9:17:20 GMT -5
Context, I was speaking of Carl S. People can make themselves accident prone, they can clarify the distortions of the body/mind, but the boatman overboard is an act of grace. It's not something anyone can gain by hard work, nor study themselves into, nor a reward for good behavior and good deeds. I have never said any different. The "boatman" is a cage. There is a way out of the prison. Never from the outside-in (for the boatman, there isn't any outside, the bars are constructed from the boatman, the boatman is the prison. This is Gopal's solipsism). Only from the inside, to out. Ramana's cop-thief. (Which I've understood for 45 years).
|
|
|
Post by sree on Sept 6, 2022 9:53:05 GMT -5
Would you say you and your wife are twin-flames? Psychology Today, using the reason of science, has scuttled the traditional definition of man and woman. Consequently, a relationship for a western man or woman is driven by reason and lacks the spirituality that had inspired great Chinese love stories. "The Butterfly Lovers" comes to mind. No carnality. Pure spiritual bonding. Zhang Yimou managed to portray this quality in this movie: You know, that was a really great question for me to contemplate last night, it was an invitation to go within and explore the different dimensions of love. It was a very pleasing half an hour reflection. 'Twin flame' used to be (I don't know if it still is) a popular idea in new age circles. Neither me nor Jenn have been very on board with it, it's all seems a bit....'needy' at times. I seem to have come across a lot of people over the years that are mourning the absence of a being they've never even spoken to. That's not to say that I'm closed to the possibility... but I don't really consider Jenn and me to be 'twin flames', though in the early days I think I may have been a bit more drawn into the idea, simply on the basis that the love that I was feeling was so compelling, such a powerful force, and so unusual to me, that it seemed plausible. We knew we would be married before we'd even seen each other with our own eyes. We've been through a lot of challenging times in the last 15 years, and although we now have an abiding stability, it's fair to say we don't often regularly feel that immense tidal wave of love that we felt in the first period, so thanks for the question, it was a good one. And thank you for a heartfelt reply. Spiritual discourse ought to be at this intense level on matters of utmost import to us. And such matters include how we relate to each other in every capacity in society: family, village, town, city, nation, and the world in which we live, together. One harmonious whole. It is such harmony that can guarantee absolute security in a state of abundance for all. Krishnamurti said that there is no path to this. Of course, there is a way. By this, I mean that we must do what you did in the manner you contemplated last night on “twin-flame” in the context of your relationship with your wife. It’s fortunate that the brutal self-examination did not earn you a failing grade. I doubt others here can pass the test. And when that happens, Psychology Today comes to the rescue to wipe out guilt and haul everyone across the finishing line. Affirmative action.
I have no idea what “twin-flame” is about. I did not use this concept (as explained by Reefs) for the term that I came across at another spiritual forum that caters to all forms of spirituality; there was a section for “Twin-flames”. It is a pretty term and evoked “The Butterfly Lovers” (see video below). In my opinion, our western perception of man and woman is all wrong.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 6, 2022 10:11:22 GMT -5
He said that "we are here, we have evolved into this form, so that the Universe may know itself". That's not even close to Ramana's Who am I? Carl's answer is to "why am I here? : so that the Universe may know itself". Of course it's an answer to "Who am I?". To Carl, the answer was that who he is, is to be here so that the Universe may know itself. The existential question comes in a myriad of forms, but it's always the same question at core.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 6, 2022 10:16:22 GMT -5
People can make themselves accident prone, they can clarify the distortions of the body/mind, but the boatman overboard is an act of grace. It's not something anyone can gain by hard work, nor study themselves into, nor a reward for good behavior and good deeds. I have never said any different. The "boatman" is a cage. There is a way out of the prison. Never from the outside-in (for the boatman, there isn't any outside, the bars are constructed from the boatman, the boatman is the prison. This is Gopal's solipsism). Only from the inside, to out. Ramana's cop-thief. (Which I've understood for 45 years). You certainly implied otherwise by writing that "getting past the small self is hard". I'm not going to argue with you about what you think you meant, but no, "getting past the small self" only seems hard to someone who hasn't yet. And not even every someone btw. Afterwards, the issue becomes quite clear, and noone absent the boatman would ever say that "getting rid of the boatman is hard". Only a pilfering mall cop would say such a thing.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 6, 2022 13:57:08 GMT -5
I have never said any different. The "boatman" is a cage. There is a way out of the prison. Never from the outside-in (for the boatman, there isn't any outside, the bars are constructed from the boatman, the boatman is the prison. This is Gopal's solipsism). Only from the inside, to out. Ramana's cop-thief. (Which I've understood for 45 years). You certainly implied otherwise by writing that "getting past the small self is hard". I'm not going to argue with you about what you think you meant, but no, "getting past the small self" only seems hard to someone who hasn't yet. And not even every someone btw. Afterwards, the issue becomes quite clear, and noone absent the boatman would ever say that "getting rid of the boatman is hard". Only a pilfering mall cop would say such a thing. I've had one view for 45 years. But yes I've been a sorry student. I wouldn't post here in disagreement with that > view<. Attention and/or awareness is the way. No thinking, feelings/emotions, bodily actions or sensations, that is, no doing (which actually aren't doing, these merely happen) by the "boatman" leads anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 7, 2022 1:26:03 GMT -5
But suffering doesn't mean you will become a seeker. Correct. Some people do alcohol, drugs, even very nasty drugs...there are a whole host of means of escaping. I want some of those
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 7, 2022 1:31:37 GMT -5
it doesn't matter what the paths are it's the end result. And there can only be one. That's why it cannot be based on a Kensho experience. Because if you have one such experience then why not 7? Why not 57? When does that end You could go on for ever having more and more kensho experiences. That cannot be liberation which is clear and final, which is peace of mind and the cessation of suffering. There is no doubt about it. There cannot be different interpretations or versions of that. And If you were an unrealized quantum physicist and then attained SR it is likely you would still carry on with your physics pursuits where you experienced insights before and you will experience insights about physics afterwards. But such insights have nothing to do with liberation which is the living reality of being free in the natural state regardless of whatever interests you might have in the relative. According to what Buddha told his disciples, he had one experience that resulted in liberation and freedom. He supposedly told them that after meditating for a certain period of time, he looked up into the morning sky from where he sat and saw the planet Venus. This sensory event triggered realization, and that's a classic kensho event. What's unusual is that the Buddha apparently attained freedom, realization, and permanent liberation as a result of that one event. Most people who have such things happen do not. Nevertheless, I'll drop this issue because you obviously have a deep attachment to the idea that liberation can only happen in one way. Having read hundreds of spiritual biographies and autobiographies of sages, it's clear to me that each human's path to realization is quite unique. Heh. It's weird I never heard that story
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 7, 2022 1:42:09 GMT -5
You're trying to manufacture the Buddhas considerable meditation time under the Bodhi tree as a kensho event. That's a contrivance. There is nothing in the Buddhist teachings centered around the noble truths and the eightfold path that promotes what you refer to as kensho experiences. In the Zen tradition there isn't much discussion of the eightfold path, and intellectualization and attachment to ideas is eschewed. The primary teaching is that what's important is discovering what the Buddha discovered, so people are told how to meditate, and encouraged to pursue that path until realizations occur. There are countless stories of what happened to various people who followed that advice, and kensho events commonly result after periods of deep samadhi. I think that the Buddha reported that his realization occurred after looking at the planet Venus rising in the morning sky. One monk woke up after hearing a pebble strike a bamboo fence. Another guy woke up after smelling peach blossoms. Hakuin said that his deepest existential insight occurred upon hearing the sound of falling snow. Without a reference for what the word "kensho" points to, I can understand why people have no comprehension of it. FWIW, meditation is not a kensho event. A kensho event occurs suddenly, by grace, and if it's deep, reality disintegrates, one comes face to face with Source, and various existential questions are instantly resolved. Whether people believe this or not is not my concern. I find that hard to believe.
I'm familiar with events being sudden. That's a thing... and also source aka true nature happens suddenly.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 7, 2022 2:00:54 GMT -5
If you are getting beaten by a stick that's suffering. If you're chasing a carrot that's also suffering because you will not be satisfied until you get the carrot. If suffering is the primary driver, then suffering will be the filter through which everything is interpreted. Fortunately, it's possible to find the truth as a result of simple curiosity. And some lucky people find the truth without being driven by either suffering or curiosity. Paul Morgan-Somers is one example--no questioning, no suffering, no curiosity, just.....BAM! Right out of the blue, and that doesn't fit any model of how such a thing might happen. The philosophy is something along the lines of, will/volition arises in ignorance and manifests the sensations that we react to with cravings that elicit the volition - and around kamma wheel goes. Suffering is caused by craving, and the chain is broken through cessation of such reactions to sensations (vedana). That's the nutshell version.
|
|