Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2023 22:17:23 GMT -5
Because that's what's happening. 😃 Non doership doesn't negate the experience on a personal level of cause and effect. I know that my next thought or action will just appear quite spontaneously without personal doership but then if someone asks me, did you do that I will say yes I did that. I will claim it was my action after the fact. Do you see that as a contradiction? Ok.. I glanced at this morning and thought that we were going to dig in and explain what this 'non-doership' really is. So I'm still going to do that if you don't mind? Are you saying that because thought and action is formed from the immediate environment, rather than from a parallel movement inside the skull that claims to be the developer of thoughts and therefore actions. That this understanding, is what is called.. non-doership? In the absence of an I that feels he or she is doing something there is just the doing without the authorship of I. That doesn't change the fact that deeds are done. When awareness is the dominant force or experience it sweeps away any sense of I if I can put it like that. But everyone has this experience of sometimes being in effortless autopilot mode where things are just happening despite you being there but you seem to be more of an observer than a doer. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Aug 4, 2023 3:51:01 GMT -5
Ok.. I glanced at this morning and thought that we were going to dig in and explain what this 'non-doership' really is. So I'm still going to do that if you don't mind? Are you saying that because thought and action is formed from the immediate environment, rather than from a parallel movement inside the skull that claims to be the developer of thoughts and therefore actions. That this understanding, is what is called.. non-doership? In the absence of an I that feels he or she is doing something there is just the doing without the authorship of I. That doesn't change the fact that deeds are done. When awareness is the dominant force or experience it sweeps away any sense of I if I can put it like that. But everyone has this experience of sometimes being in effortless autopilot mode where things are just happening despite you being there but you seem to be more of an observer than a doer. ok.. got ya.. How is an absence recognised? Is it only known or surmised upon the return of a presence? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2023 6:15:22 GMT -5
In the absence of an I that feels he or she is doing something there is just the doing without the authorship of I. That doesn't change the fact that deeds are done. When awareness is the dominant force or experience it sweeps away any sense of I if I can put it like that. But everyone has this experience of sometimes being in effortless autopilot mode where things are just happening despite you being there but you seem to be more of an observer than a doer. ok.. got ya.. How is an absence recognised? Is it only known or surmised upon the return of a presence? That's a really good question. The absence of I is recognized not by its absence but by what replaces it which is the real I or unbounded I, in other words awareness. It's that which is presence, not the limited egoic I which has dissolved. If one makes the statement, I am here, it's not the I that is here, it's the here that is here. Being here is usually wrongly attributed to I. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 4, 2023 11:56:23 GMT -5
I'm going to try to wrap this up. This will speak to the fly in the ointment. It's info I've never encountered anywhere else. Still from Living Yogacara.
(I will summarize some, in parenthesis, and continue with quotes).
(We deal with people every day, there is a relationship between people, things and events, and "I"). But the content of these relationships is going to depend greatly upon the way in which we cognize these things. (We first encounter these via the first subjective transformation, alaya-vijnana, which again is the storehouse of all past experiences, and influence greatly new present experience, and this is subconscious processing). The manas, the second subjective transformation, then attempts to understand each thing with unfathomable self-centeredness. The ground of our daily cognitive life lies in the deep mind of (these two subjective transformations). Although we believe that we live in a fully conscious and aware manner, upon taking into full account (of the two subjective transformations) it becomes difficult to maintain the view that we conduct our lives only through our conscious awareness. ...underneath everything lies a profoundly unknowable psychological basis.
(Hopefully the eggplant metaphor) serves to show the limitations of the mano-vijnana [ordinary thinking mind, the 3rd subjective transformation] in accounting for the totality of our lived experience. Since the thinking mind is subject to interruptions (sleep for example) it cannot be a full account of reality. ...yet we are nonetheless living unified and continuous lives....But this does not mean we should regard the conscious mind as being insignificant. ...our ability to learn from experiences and progress into the future is only made possible by the thinking consciousness in the present moment. ...
The function of the deep mind is to continuously maintain the impressions and disposition of past experiences in the form of seeds without any loss. This can be seen as the original framework of individuality, but it would be more proper to call it a "formless original form". ...While understanding the store consciousness as the basis of existence, if there is no conscious awareness, that which we call "I" as no medium to function in society....
Our mind does not simply cognize objects exactly as they exist in themselves. On the contrary, it is fundamentally disposed to subjectively alter everything that is seen heard, and touched. Our minds carry out such subjective transformations at three levels. (Discussed above). ...Once we understand this teaching, we can no longer continue assuming that we are cognizing thing as they actually exist. ...This may lead to wonder how we can ever hope to attain a correct perspective. pgs 77-81
Getting to the fly in the ointment.
The idea that everyone possesses the ability to become a buddha serves to encourage our interest in the notion of enlightenment. ...Yogacara Buddhism takes a considerably different standpoint from other Mahayana Buddhist schools on this point--a considerably more realistic approach. The notion that all beings possess the buddha-nature is understood as an ideal that all practitioners should continuously orient themselves toward. But Yogacara argues that in terms of actual practice, such an attainment is almost impossible, and goes on to state that there is a type of sentient being who cannot attain buddhahood.
This may startle some. Buddhism is a religion that invites us to reach for liberation, and directly bring us there. ...we certainly cannot say that all sentient beings are endowed with the same capacity for the elimination of evil and the cultivation of goodness. ...the Yogacaras understood that all living beings do not uniformly become buddhas in the same way, and furthermore, that the state that they attain differs according to their predilections. They differentiated between three paths to the attainment of liberation, the path of direct disciples, the path of adepts who achieve enlightenment based on their own effort and insights, and the bodhisattva vehicle (putting others first), Three Vehicle Buddhism.
(There are five categories of distinctive proclivities, which include) both afflictive and cognitive hindrances. (Therefore) "Liberation" is understood to have two different aspects, known as nirvana (extinction of suffering) and bodhi (enlightened wisdom). It is said that nirvana and bodhi were both attained by the Buddha upon enlightenment. Nirvana refers to the state of peace attained in mind and body, whereas bodhi refers to true wisdom.
The fly in the ointment, a bombshell actually.
We carry out our lives assuming ourselves to be something substantial and unchanging, and we become deeply attached to this assumed self. But we attach to more than simply a notion of self. We also reify the things that we see, hear and think, into substances, and attach to them as well. This is called attachment to dharmas. Among these two attachments, it may be the case that we can earnestly reflect and bring ourselves to our attachment to self, making an effort to avoid it. But attachment to the dharmas occurs at such a subtle level that stemming it based on conscious reflective awareness is practically impossible for most people. We grasp at all dharmas (all phenomena), despite the fact that they are nothing more than a provisional combination of elements according to certain conditions. Taking these as the framework created from our past experiences, along with accordance to our individual circumstances, we see, hear, and think. When we regard the content of of such seeing, hearing, and thinking to be accurate, attachment to dharmas ends up being far more difficult to come to reconcile than attachment to self (emphasis sdp). How do you deal with something that is virtually unnoticeable? This attachment to dharmas engenders the cognitive hindrances, while attachment to self engenders the afflictive hinderances. Nirvana is said to manifest based on the removal of the afflictive hinderances, while bodhi is obtained by the elimination of the cognitive hindrances. ...
Based on their exertion of effort, practitioners of these two types are said to be capable of completely severing the attachment to self. They have to potential to manifest a certain type of liberation, but that form of liberation is radically different in quality from the perfect enlightenment experienced by the Buddha.
Bypassing some of the weeds, we come to...
Among these, only the first three groups contain the bodhisattva nature, and this the proclivity for eliminating both kinds of hindrances of afflictive and cognitive, and are able to proceed toward an enlightenment equal to that of the Buddha. pgs 103-106
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think that does it, but this explains a lot for me from a Buddhist perspective. Going to take a break, I may summarize later, in case I need to put a microscope on the fly. But, basically, all this is the problem SR has been unable to explain for me, why SR [doesn't] solve all the problems. All this explains why there are still [obvious] distortions of one sort or the other in the SR. And all this explains the necessity for "purification", the absolute necessity. And IOW, this supports my view that the mind-body-"person" is not a result of the direct manifestation of All That Is, but All That Is is filtered through and shaped by the baggage of the three subjective transformations, alaya-vijnana, manas, and the thinking mind, that these three mediate all experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 4, 2023 14:26:05 GMT -5
Ok.. I glanced at this morning and thought that we were going to dig in and explain what this 'non-doership' really is. So I'm still going to do that if you don't mind? Are you saying that because thought and action is formed from the immediate environment, rather than from a parallel movement inside the skull that claims to be the developer of thoughts and therefore actions. That this understanding, is what is called.. non-doership? In the absence of an I that feels he or she is doing something there is just the doing without the authorship of I. That doesn't change the fact that deeds are done. When awareness is the dominant force or experience it sweeps away any sense of I if I can put it like that. But everyone has this experience of sometimes being in effortless autopilot mode where things are just happening despite you being there but you seem to be more of an observer than a doer. The thing is most have had the experience of being on autopilot when washing the dishes or doing something else . This doesn't negate that one is washing the dishes just because one isn't consciously thinking that . One doesn't have to pay attention to themselves 24/7 to reflect an individual self to be an individual . The foundation is set already in place to facilitate that motion . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2023 21:28:17 GMT -5
In the absence of an I that feels he or she is doing something there is just the doing without the authorship of I. That doesn't change the fact that deeds are done. When awareness is the dominant force or experience it sweeps away any sense of I if I can put it like that. But everyone has this experience of sometimes being in effortless autopilot mode where things are just happening despite you being there but you seem to be more of an observer than a doer. The thing is most have had the experience of being on autopilot when washing the dishes or doing something else . This doesn't negate that one is washing the dishes just because one isn't consciously thinking that . One doesn't have to pay attention to themselves 24/7 to reflect an individual self to be an individual . The foundation is set already in place to facilitate that motion . If you're not consciously thinking that you're washing the dishes which would be a very unlikely way of operating, then the dishes are just being washed. If we had to consciously think about every single thing we were doing life would be mentally exhausting. Yet some people do it deliberately and call it mindfulness. 😃 |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 5, 2023 2:25:25 GMT -5
The thing is most have had the experience of being on autopilot when washing the dishes or doing something else . This doesn't negate that one is washing the dishes just because one isn't consciously thinking that . One doesn't have to pay attention to themselves 24/7 to reflect an individual self to be an individual . The foundation is set already in place to facilitate that motion . If you're not consciously thinking that you're washing the dishes which would be a very unlikely way of operating, then the dishes are just being washed. If we had to consciously think about every single thing we were doing life would be mentally exhausting. Yet some people do it deliberately and call it mindfulness. 😃 What I mean is, one can be quite absent minded and one can wash the dishes without thinking constantly that they are. Just because the washing of the dishes get done in these instances doesn't mean there wasn't anyone there doing it . The foundation is that there is a thought of oneself fundamentally and primarily in order for one to entertain the thought to wash them. What happens thereafter matters not. As we know Ramana couldn't even wash himself or feed himself when the sense of the self was no more. It's not as if Ramana was washing his plate declaring no-one is here . When there is no-one here, there is no-one to wash the dishes, there is no-one here to say that . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2023 2:31:39 GMT -5
If you're not consciously thinking that you're washing the dishes which would be a very unlikely way of operating, then the dishes are just being washed. If we had to consciously think about every single thing we were doing life would be mentally exhausting. Yet some people do it deliberately and call it mindfulness. 😃 What I mean is, one can be quite absent minded and one can wash the dishes without thinking constantly that they are. Just because the washing of the dishes get done in these instances doesn't mean there wasn't anyone there doing it . The foundation is that there is a thought of oneself fundamentally and primarily in order for one to entertain the thought to wash them. What happens thereafter matters not. As we know Ramana couldn't even wash himself or feed himself when the sense of the self was no more. It's not as if Ramana was washing his plate declaring no-one is here . When there is no-one here, there is no-one to wash the dishes, there is no-one here to say that . That's not true what you said about Ramana. He lived a normal active life. He managed to cut up vegetables at 4:00 in the morning everyday as a non-doer. He also read the newspaper everyday from cover to cover and supervised the building of the ashram right down to the proportions of cement that was mixed. Does that sound like somebody who was incapable? There is no one washing dishes. There's just the experience of washing dishes which is happening to no one. If you ask me, did I wash the dishes I will say yes, I washed the dishes, but when I was actually washing the dishes there was no one washing the dishes. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 5, 2023 2:32:41 GMT -5
It's like the swan thinking it's a duck . So when there is the doings had, it is always the doings of the swan regardless of what one thinks .
In the same vein it doesn't matter if one wants to say they are not here or no-one is doing anything . It doesn't change the foundation that the individual is present.
The individual is the doer. What is the individual in relation to all that is?
I believe just like the person and what that constitutes in relation to the individual and all that is is greatly misunderstood ..
|
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 5, 2023 2:38:21 GMT -5
What I mean is, one can be quite absent minded and one can wash the dishes without thinking constantly that they are. Just because the washing of the dishes get done in these instances doesn't mean there wasn't anyone there doing it . The foundation is that there is a thought of oneself fundamentally and primarily in order for one to entertain the thought to wash them. What happens thereafter matters not. As we know Ramana couldn't even wash himself or feed himself when the sense of the self was no more. It's not as if Ramana was washing his plate declaring no-one is here . When there is no-one here, there is no-one to wash the dishes, there is no-one here to say that . That's not true what you said about Ramana. He lived a normal active life. He managed to cut up vegetables at 4:00 in the morning everyday as a non-doer. He also read the newspaper everyday from cover to cover and supervised the building of the ashram right down to the proportions of cement that was mixed. Does that sound like somebody who was incapable? There is no one washing dishes. There's just the experience of washing dishes which is happening to no one. If you ask me, did I wash the dishes I will say yes, I washed the dishes, but when I was actually washing the dishes there was no one washing the dishes. There is either a sense of self or the little 'I' or there isn't . There is either self awareness or one needing to prepare food or there isn't. Why would Ramana prepare food when there was no sense of oneself present as someone that requires food. This isn't correct. When one transcends the little I or self then one would not be mindful or aware of food . That is why one enters a state of non functioning when self awareness is no more . You have to look at ones actions and behaviours and what one is doing in these instances. That is the dead give away . Getting up to prepare any meal or clean any dishes reflects self awareness and self mindfulness . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2023 2:46:27 GMT -5
That's not true what you said about Ramana. He lived a normal active life. He managed to cut up vegetables at 4:00 in the morning everyday as a non-doer. He also read the newspaper everyday from cover to cover and supervised the building of the ashram right down to the proportions of cement that was mixed. Does that sound like somebody who was incapable? There is no one washing dishes. There's just the experience of washing dishes which is happening to no one. If you ask me, did I wash the dishes I will say yes, I washed the dishes, but when I was actually washing the dishes there was no one washing the dishes. There is either a sense of self or the little 'I' or there isn't . There is either self awareness or one needing to prepare food or there isn't. Why would Ramana prepare food when there was no sense of oneself present as someone that requires food. This isn't correct. When one transcends the little I or self then one would not be mindful or aware of food . That is why one enters a state of non functioning when self awareness is no more . You have to look at ones actions and behaviours and what one is doing in these instances. That is the dead give away . Getting up to prepare any meal or clean any dishes reflects self awareness and self mindfulness . Yes I believe that is your experience. You identify as an individual doer. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 5, 2023 2:55:14 GMT -5
There is either a sense of self or the little 'I' or there isn't . There is either self awareness or one needing to prepare food or there isn't. Why would Ramana prepare food when there was no sense of oneself present as someone that requires food. This isn't correct. When one transcends the little I or self then one would not be mindful or aware of food . That is why one enters a state of non functioning when self awareness is no more . You have to look at ones actions and behaviours and what one is doing in these instances. That is the dead give away . Getting up to prepare any meal or clean any dishes reflects self awareness and self mindfulness . Yes I believe that is your experience. You identify as an individual doer. So why would Ramana prepare a meal if there wasn't self awareness in reflection of requiring food . There has to be the foundation present to support that notion. One doesn't get up to prepare food if there is no-one present within awareness that relates to food in some shape or form. Do you know what I understand of what constitutes an individual in relation to all that is? For many, as soon as there is the mention of the individual alarm bells start ringing because there is the belief that it must reflect the illusory separate peep. Is there anyone on the forums that has the awareness of being an individual and not being separate from all that is? And within this awareness one takes responsibility for what they do as an individual? And within this awareness recognise that they are the doer? All I seem to hear is folks thinking that there is no-one here even though it's self evident that there is. To then dismiss this as a dream or illusory or just an appearance. It really doesn't have to be like that at all. One just has to integrate the awareness of what you are that is an individual and what you are that isn't . Anyone understand that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2023 3:06:37 GMT -5
Yes I believe that is your experience. You identify as an individual doer. So why would Ramana prepare a meal if there wasn't self awareness in reflection of requiring food . There has to be the foundation present to support that notion. One doesn't get up to prepare food if there is no-one present within awareness that relates to food in some shape or form. Do you know what I understand of what constitutes an individual in relation to all that is? For many, as soon as there is the mention of the individual alarm bells start ringing because there is the belief that it must reflect the illusory separate peep. Is there anyone on the forums that has the awareness of being an individual and not being separate from all that is? And within this awareness one takes responsibility for what they do as an individual? And within this awareness recognise that they are the doer? All I seem to hear is folks thinking that there is no-one here even though it's self evident that there is. To then dismiss this as a dream or illusory or just an appearance. It really doesn't have to be like that at all. One just has to integrate the awareness of what you are that is an individual and what you are that isn't . Anyone understand that? It would not be correct to say there is no one here like some neo advaitins claim. Clearly there is individual ego. Deeds are done like washing the dishes. Maybe you feel that you as an individual are washing the dishes, but it's also possible to experience that there is no one washing the dishes even though dishes are being washed through the vehicle of individuality because individuality itself is just something arising from awareness. So is there anyone making this individuality arise? And if individuality does not arise you still remain. As what? The non doing witness of that which appears to be the doer. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Aug 5, 2023 5:32:55 GMT -5
So why would Ramana prepare a meal if there wasn't self awareness in reflection of requiring food . There has to be the foundation present to support that notion. One doesn't get up to prepare food if there is no-one present within awareness that relates to food in some shape or form. Do you know what I understand of what constitutes an individual in relation to all that is? For many, as soon as there is the mention of the individual alarm bells start ringing because there is the belief that it must reflect the illusory separate peep. Is there anyone on the forums that has the awareness of being an individual and not being separate from all that is? And within this awareness one takes responsibility for what they do as an individual? And within this awareness recognise that they are the doer? All I seem to hear is folks thinking that there is no-one here even though it's self evident that there is. To then dismiss this as a dream or illusory or just an appearance. It really doesn't have to be like that at all. One just has to integrate the awareness of what you are that is an individual and what you are that isn't . Anyone understand that? It would not be correct to say there is no one here like some neo advaitins claim. Clearly there is individual ego. Deeds are done like washing the dishes. Maybe you feel that you as an individual are washing the dishes, but it's also possible to experience that there is no one washing the dishes even though dishes are being washed through the vehicle of individuality because individuality itself is just something arising from awareness. So is there anyone making this individuality arise? And if individuality does not arise you still remain. As what? The non doing witness of that which appears to be the doer. When peeps speak about arising in awareness it just doesn't make sense to me .. How does an individual just arise in awareness? You are not really addressing what I am asking in relation to why one would wash the dishes in the first place. There has to be an association had between what you believe you are and what relations there are for the requirement of a clean dish and some chopped carrots. This relationship is built upon self awareness . Doing all these things when there is no one here doing anything just doesn't make any sense at all . Could you answer why there would be the requirement for these things to be done and no one is doing them .. It's impossible to not have the association as a foundation in place fundamentally .. All this arising in awareness doesn't bypass this. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2023 7:31:35 GMT -5
It would not be correct to say there is no one here like some neo advaitins claim. Clearly there is individual ego. Deeds are done like washing the dishes. Maybe you feel that you as an individual are washing the dishes, but it's also possible to experience that there is no one washing the dishes even though dishes are being washed through the vehicle of individuality because individuality itself is just something arising from awareness. So is there anyone making this individuality arise? And if individuality does not arise you still remain. As what? The non doing witness of that which appears to be the doer. When peeps speak about arising in awareness it just doesn't make sense to me .. How does an individual just arise in awareness? You are not really addressing what I am asking in relation to why one would wash the dishes in the first place. There has to be an association had between what you believe you are and what relations there are for the requirement of a clean dish and some chopped carrots. This relationship is built upon self awareness . Doing all these things when there is no one here doing anything just doesn't make any sense at all . Could you answer why there would be the requirement for these things to be done and no one is doing them .. It's impossible to not have the association as a foundation in place fundamentally .. All this arising in awareness doesn't bypass this. I am unable to give an answer that will satisfy you. |
|
