|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Oct 21, 2023 10:07:41 GMT -5
 True! Though one thing I wanted to clarify about what you mentioned re: the "Christian koan" of everything being God's will... you said therefore the only free will would be whether or not you (freely) chose to accept God's love? I assume that means accepting whatever is the case in the moment, since that is God's will? Or did you mean something else? Whatever is is whatever is, no doubt, but that doesn't mean that we always will or should or even can accept that it shouldn't change. And since now we're in the context of time, we can't even really say that things might not have been preferable had they happened differently -- although that's one of the funniest "koan-like" thoughts imaginable if you consider it in existential terms. Rather, in any given instant, the Christian can never really be absolutely certain that they are not in sin. They can do the best they can by what we might characterize in modern terms by a sort of rule base. They can pray. And then, action happens. Ready or not! Oh I see. That's much more like predestination. Not that I'm particularly familiar with Christian mysticism or theology, but I was imagining something much more along the lines of killing self-will, like, again, Jesus at Gethsemane: "not as I will, but as you will"... |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 21, 2023 11:18:17 GMT -5
No. I advocate for nirvikalpa samadhi. That is what I'm ultimately talking about. Now you are suggesting that some people move towards that so that sounds like you're giving it your seal of approval So we do agree. Where we disagree is on the possibility of not reacting. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 21, 2023 11:21:58 GMT -5
Whatever is is whatever is, no doubt, but that doesn't mean that we always will or should or even can accept that it shouldn't change. And since now we're in the context of time, we can't even really say that things might not have been preferable had they happened differently -- although that's one of the funniest "koan-like" thoughts imaginable if you consider it in existential terms. Rather, in any given instant, the Christian can never really be absolutely certain that they are not in sin. They can do the best they can by what we might characterize in modern terms by a sort of rule base. They can pray. And then, action happens. Ready or not! Oh I see. That's much more like predestination. Not that I'm particularly familiar with Christian mysticism or theology, but I was imagining something much more along the lines of killing self-will, like, again, Jesus at Gethsemane: "not as I will, but as you will"... No, not predestination. Not every Christian will ever get to a point of such confusion - perhaps even despair - that the ego collapses. Like, entirely. I'm trying to describe those that might. Of course, there's a bit of an idealization going on here. |
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Oct 21, 2023 11:52:12 GMT -5
Oh I see. That's much more like predestination. Not that I'm particularly familiar with Christian mysticism or theology, but I was imagining something much more along the lines of killing self-will, like, again, Jesus at Gethsemane: "not as I will, but as you will"... No, not predestination. Not every Christian will ever get to a point of such confusion - perhaps even despair - that the ego collapses. Like, entirely. I'm trying to describe those that might. Of course, there's a bit of an idealization going on here. Interesting. Isn't predestination just the kind of koan that might lead to such a collapse, though? The idea that God controls -- indeed has already decided -- who will be graced with salvation. Yet one must act anyhow in an attempt to live up to divine law because one's attempts NOT to would be a sign that God had not chosen one... It seems a despair-inducing, ego-collapsing dilemma of sorts, perhaps. "I can't go on. I'll go on." |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 21, 2023 12:18:23 GMT -5
No. I advocate for nirvikalpa samadhi. That is what I'm ultimately talking about. Now you are suggesting that some people move towards that so that sounds like you're giving it your seal of approval So we do agree. I'm just curious about what you think the role of NS is? I've speculated that it may function something like a mental lubricant that somehow loosens up thought structures or makes the shifting of neural pathways more likely. My speculation is based upon the fact that many Zen students have realizations that follow deep states of NS. ATST, there are many people (maybe most) who wake up without ever having experienced NS. In the Zen tradition NS is a big deal and many Zen Masters encourage the kind of concentrated focus of attention that results in NS, but in other non-dual traditions it doesn't play such an important role. OTOH there are Ramakrishna adherents who think that being able to attain NS is equivalent to an enlightened state of mind, but I think most of us would not agree with that POV. How do you see it? |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 21, 2023 12:26:47 GMT -5
No, not predestination. Not every Christian will ever get to a point of such confusion - perhaps even despair - that the ego collapses. Like, entirely. I'm trying to describe those that might. Of course, there's a bit of an idealization going on here. Interesting. Isn't predestination just the kind of koan that might lead to such a collapse, though? The idea that God controls -- indeed has already decided -- who will be graced with salvation. Yet one must act anyhow in an attempt to live up to divine law because one's attempts NOT to would be a sign that God had not chosen one... It seems a despair-inducing, ego-collapsing dilemma of sorts, perhaps. "I can't go on. I'll go on." Interesting synchronistic digression: read recently that the Norse mythology has an ending where man and the gods are defeated by monsters, and everyone knows that already as the war plays out.  But I think that sort of soldiering on in the face of a lost cause is still a version of a materially grounded identity. What I'm talking about is a sort of "faith" regardless of circumstances or conditions, with no ground beneath it other than the present moment and a willingness to embrace radical self-honesty. "In this moment, do I love God, or not?" |
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Oct 21, 2023 13:18:22 GMT -5
Interesting. Isn't predestination just the kind of koan that might lead to such a collapse, though? The idea that God controls -- indeed has already decided -- who will be graced with salvation. Yet one must act anyhow in an attempt to live up to divine law because one's attempts NOT to would be a sign that God had not chosen one... It seems a despair-inducing, ego-collapsing dilemma of sorts, perhaps. "I can't go on. I'll go on." Interesting synchronistic digression: read recently that the Norse mythology has an ending where man and the gods are defeated by monsters, and everyone knows that already as the war plays out. Oh fascinating! A ragnarok where the monsters win?? I'm going to have to read more about this. In Hindu mythology things do certainly end badly for everyone... everything goes in giant blazes and is essentially annihilated. BUT then once we're ground back down to dust, it all gets sucked back into God and then things restart, so to say. Hrmm... this mention of faith reminds me of Kierkegaard's knight of faith, who aligns himself to God's will but at the same time believes that he will get exactly what he wants, completely and totally. Not that this makes any rational sense. He embraces it though it does not make any sense, and is absurd, indeed, in some sense, knowing that it can never be comprehended, but that all things are possible for God. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Oct 21, 2023 19:03:38 GMT -5
Interesting. Isn't predestination just the kind of koan that might lead to such a collapse, though? The idea that God controls -- indeed has already decided -- who will be graced with salvation. Yet one must act anyhow in an attempt to live up to divine law because one's attempts NOT to would be a sign that God had not chosen one... It seems a despair-inducing, ego-collapsing dilemma of sorts, perhaps. "I can't go on. I'll go on." Interesting synchronistic digression: read recently that the Norse mythology has an ending where man and the gods are defeated by monsters, and everyone knows that already as the war plays out. But I think that sort of soldiering on in the face of a lost cause is still a version of a materially grounded identity. What I'm talking about is a sort of "faith" regardless of circumstances or conditions, with no ground beneath it other than the present moment and a willingness to embrace radical self-honesty. "In this moment, do I love God, or not?" I used to try and talk about this, and I like the way you expressed it here. Specifically, I used to say the faith was an end in itself, for the sake of itself. Nothing achieved from it, nothing gained, no attempt to 'use' faith to change or manipulate. Just faith in faith itself. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 1:13:23 GMT -5
I advocate for nirvikalpa samadhi. That is what I'm ultimately talking about. Now you are suggesting that some people move towards that so that sounds like you're giving it your seal of approval So we do agree. I'm just curious about what you think the role of NS is? I've speculated that it may function something like a mental lubricant that somehow loosens up thought structures or makes the shifting of neural pathways more likely. My speculation is based upon the fact that many Zen students have realizations that follow deep states of NS. ATST, there are many people (maybe most) who wake up without ever having experienced NS. In the Zen tradition NS is a big deal and many Zen Masters encourage the kind of concentrated focus of attention that results in NS, but in other non-dual traditions it doesn't play such an important role. OTOH there are Ramakrishna adherents who think that being able to attain NS is equivalent to an enlightened state of mind, but I think most of us would not agree with that POV. How do you see it? Nirvikalpa samadhi is at the very core of non-dual Advaita Vedanta (the main non-dual tradition) as Adi Shankara (the so-called father of advaita) makes clear in Vivekachudamani. 353. When the Atman, the One without a second, is realised by means of the Nirvikalpa Samadhi, then the heart’s knot of ignorance is totally destroyed. 357. Through the diversity of the supervening conditions (Upadhis), a man is apt to think of himself as also full of diversity; but with the removal of these he is again his own Self, the immutable. Therefore the wise man should ever devote himself to the practice of Nirvikalpa Samadhi, for the dissolution of the Upadhis. 362. When the mind, thus purified by constant practice, is merged in Brahman, then Samadhi passes on from the Savikalpa to the Nirvikalpa stage, and leads directly to the realisation of the Bliss of Brahman, the One without a second. 363. By this Samadhi are destroyed all desires which are like knots, all work is at an end, and inside and out there takes place everywhere and always the spontaneous manifestation of one’s real nature. 364. Reflection should be considered a hundred times superior to hearing, and meditation a hundred thousand times superior even to reflection, but the Nirvikalpa Samadhi is infinite in its results. 365. By the Nirvikalpa Samadhi the truth of Brahman is clearly and definitely realised, but not otherwise, for then the mind, being unstable by nature, is apt to be mixed up with other perceptions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 3:05:47 GMT -5
YOGA
A higher form of darsana is available to students of the Samkhya-Yoga system, which followed and adopted the samadhi yoga of Patanjali. Adept practitioners of Samkhya-Yoga experience a state called nirvikalpa-samadhi in which they transcend the sense of ego (ahamkara) along with the ability to think (manas) and understand (buddhi). All three psychic senses are absorbed into that yogic form of deep sleep leaving the individual Self in a thought-free (nirvikalpa) state. This is known as the state of aloneness (kaivalya) in the Yogasutra of Patanjali.
Non-dual Kashmir (Tantric) shaivism
Shambhavayoga – In this highest form of practice, the minds’ tendency is to think of himself as one with Ultimate Reality and nothing else. The practitioner stands still and loses itself in the vibrant glow of I-consciousness. It is the practice of non-ideation (nirvikalpa).
Buddhism
Nirvikalpa Samadhi is generally considered to incorporate the following four Jhanas within its scope:
8) Eighth Jhana:
beyond perception and non perception
7) Seventh Jhana
jhana of pure emptiness
6) Sixth Jhana:
jhana of pure expansive consciousness
5) Fifth Jhana:
jhana of boundless space
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 22, 2023 13:35:12 GMT -5
I'm just curious about what you think the role of NS is? I've speculated that it may function something like a mental lubricant that somehow loosens up thought structures or makes the shifting of neural pathways more likely. My speculation is based upon the fact that many Zen students have realizations that follow deep states of NS. ATST, there are many people (maybe most) who wake up without ever having experienced NS. In the Zen tradition NS is a big deal and many Zen Masters encourage the kind of concentrated focus of attention that results in NS, but in other non-dual traditions it doesn't play such an important role. OTOH there are Ramakrishna adherents who think that being able to attain NS is equivalent to an enlightened state of mind, but I think most of us would not agree with that POV. How do you see it? Nirvikalpa samadhi is at the very core of non-dual Advaita Vedanta (the main non-dual tradition) as Adi Shankara (the so-called father of advaita) makes clear in Vivekachudamani. 353. When the Atman, the One without a second, is realised by means of the Nirvikalpa Samadhi, then the heart’s knot of ignorance is totally destroyed. 357. Through the diversity of the supervening conditions (Upadhis), a man is apt to think of himself as also full of diversity; but with the removal of these he is again his own Self, the immutable. Therefore the wise man should ever devote himself to the practice of Nirvikalpa Samadhi, for the dissolution of the Upadhis. 362. When the mind, thus purified by constant practice, is merged in Brahman, then Samadhi passes on from the Savikalpa to the Nirvikalpa stage, and leads directly to the realisation of the Bliss of Brahman, the One without a second. 363. By this Samadhi are destroyed all desires which are like knots, all work is at an end, and inside and out there takes place everywhere and always the spontaneous manifestation of one’s real nature. 364. Reflection should be considered a hundred times superior to hearing, and meditation a hundred thousand times superior even to reflection, but the Nirvikalpa Samadhi is infinite in its results. 365. By the Nirvikalpa Samadhi the truth of Brahman is clearly and definitely realised, but not otherwise, for then the mind, being unstable by nature, is apt to be mixed up with other perceptions. That's interesting, but do you realize that thousands of people have awakened without ever experiencing NS? I'm not denigrating NS, but people who have repeatedly experienced NS often remain entranced in the consensus paradigm until various realizations have spontaneously occurred. In fact, the people most likely to have experienced NS are usually people who have pursued a meditative practice. Non-meditators almost never experience any kind of deep samadhi, yet many of them realize the Self/THIS simply as a result of self-enquiry or pursuing other meditative activities that never trigger NS. It should also be remembered that many people wake up "right out of the blue" (Paul Morgan-Somers) or as a result of the cessation of mind talk (Terry Stephens, Norio Kushi, Gary Weber, etc), and some of those people never meditated in any formal sense or experienced NS. The reason that many ND sages eschew NS and any other state of mind that's transient is that they consider it an experience rather than a realization, and people often get attached to ususual experiences. The question that a ND sage might ask someone who considered NS necessary is, "Who is it that experiences NS?" The answer to that question would likely reveal whether any significant realizations have resulted from experiencing NS. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 22, 2023 14:11:25 GMT -5
Interesting synchronistic digression: read recently that the Norse mythology has an ending where man and the gods are defeated by monsters, and everyone knows that already as the war plays out. Oh fascinating! A ragnarok where the monsters win?? I'm going to have to read more about this. In Hindu mythology things do certainly end badly for everyone... everything goes in giant blazes and is essentially annihilated. BUT then once we're ground back down to dust, it all gets sucked back into God and then things restart, so to say. Hrmm... this mention of faith reminds me of Kierkegaard's knight of faith, who aligns himself to God's will but at the same time believes that he will get exactly what he wants, completely and totally. Not that this makes any rational sense. He embraces it though it does not make any sense, and is absurd, indeed, in some sense, knowing that it can never be comprehended, but that all things are possible for God. Ah, the similarities in the two mythologies might hint at deeper cultural interconnections between west-asia and the sub-continent where the histories trail off back into the mists. Started reading Kierkegaard at one point, but it didn't hold my interest back then. Now that I've had some recent Christian experience, it might read differently. I believe he coined the idea of "subjective truth", if I recall. Certainly, the wiki on this "knight of faith" suggests something similar to what zd and reefs write about the "natural state". Perhaps interesting to note also how what I'm referring to by the "Christian koan" has Zen "not-knowing" at the root of it. When we dance with words this close to the cliff face, they often swirl in these ways that point the same even though there are contradictions in the common meaning. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 22, 2023 14:12:56 GMT -5
Interesting synchronistic digression: read recently that the Norse mythology has an ending where man and the gods are defeated by monsters, and everyone knows that already as the war plays out. But I think that sort of soldiering on in the face of a lost cause is still a version of a materially grounded identity. What I'm talking about is a sort of "faith" regardless of circumstances or conditions, with no ground beneath it other than the present moment and a willingness to embrace radical self-honesty. "In this moment, do I love God, or not?" I used to try and talk about this, and I like the way you expressed it here. Specifically, I used to say the faith was an end in itself, for the sake of itself. Nothing achieved from it, nothing gained, no attempt to 'use' faith to change or manipulate. Just faith in faith itself. Yes, I recall you writing about this. Said back then: "belief" and "faith" are actually antonyms. Institutional Christianity conflated the two as synonyms. Seemingly, long ago. I see more innocence in this conflation these days than I did when I first noticed this. Another way to conceive of faith that I think is resonant with what you wrote about it is: the absence of belief. And I completely understand why some folks who had to shake off some of the Christian cultural artifacts might have an initial reaction to the word that is negative. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2023 19:54:13 GMT -5
Nirvikalpa samadhi is at the very core of non-dual Advaita Vedanta (the main non-dual tradition) as Adi Shankara (the so-called father of advaita) makes clear in Vivekachudamani. 353. When the Atman, the One without a second, is realised by means of the Nirvikalpa Samadhi, then the heart’s knot of ignorance is totally destroyed. 357. Through the diversity of the supervening conditions (Upadhis), a man is apt to think of himself as also full of diversity; but with the removal of these he is again his own Self, the immutable. Therefore the wise man should ever devote himself to the practice of Nirvikalpa Samadhi, for the dissolution of the Upadhis. 362. When the mind, thus purified by constant practice, is merged in Brahman, then Samadhi passes on from the Savikalpa to the Nirvikalpa stage, and leads directly to the realisation of the Bliss of Brahman, the One without a second. 363. By this Samadhi are destroyed all desires which are like knots, all work is at an end, and inside and out there takes place everywhere and always the spontaneous manifestation of one’s real nature. 364. Reflection should be considered a hundred times superior to hearing, and meditation a hundred thousand times superior even to reflection, but the Nirvikalpa Samadhi is infinite in its results. 365. By the Nirvikalpa Samadhi the truth of Brahman is clearly and definitely realised, but not otherwise, for then the mind, being unstable by nature, is apt to be mixed up with other perceptions. That's interesting, but do you realize that thousands of people have awakened without ever experiencing NS? I'm not denigrating NS, but people who have repeatedly experienced NS often remain entranced in the consensus paradigm until various realizations have spontaneously occurred. In fact, the people most likely to have experienced NS are usually people who have pursued a meditative practice. Non-meditators almost never experience any kind of deep samadhi, yet many of them realize the Self/THIS simply as a result of self-enquiry or pursuing other meditative activities that never trigger NS. It should also be remembered that many people wake up "right out of the blue" (Paul Morgan-Somers) or as a result of the cessation of mind talk (Terry Stephens, Norio Kushi, Gary Weber, etc), and some of those people never meditated in any formal sense or experienced NS. The reason that many ND sages eschew NS and any other state of mind that's transient is that they consider it an experience rather than a realization, and people often get attached to ususual experiences. The question that a ND sage might ask someone who considered NS necessary is, "Who is it that experiences NS?" The answer to that question would likely reveal whether any significant realizations have resulted from experiencing NS. Since full Awakening which is Self-realization is nirvikalpa samadhi become sahaja samadhi, it's unavoidable to experience nirvikalpa even if it's only experienced once without any prior practice as was the case with Ramana Maharshi. In his case he experienced nirvikalpa which instantaneously became sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi or SR. It is impossible for me to know if the people you have mentioned are Self-realized so I can't make any comparisons. Paul Morgan-Somers talks a lot about the ocean. That is nirvikalpa. It doesn't mean there isn't NS just because the word isn't used or if there is a different way of describing it |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 23, 2023 6:34:30 GMT -5
That's interesting, but do you realize that thousands of people have awakened without ever experiencing NS? I'm not denigrating NS, but people who have repeatedly experienced NS often remain entranced in the consensus paradigm until various realizations have spontaneously occurred. In fact, the people most likely to have experienced NS are usually people who have pursued a meditative practice. Non-meditators almost never experience any kind of deep samadhi, yet many of them realize the Self/THIS simply as a result of self-enquiry or pursuing other meditative activities that never trigger NS. It should also be remembered that many people wake up "right out of the blue" (Paul Morgan-Somers) or as a result of the cessation of mind talk (Terry Stephens, Norio Kushi, Gary Weber, etc), and some of those people never meditated in any formal sense or experienced NS. The reason that many ND sages eschew NS and any other state of mind that's transient is that they consider it an experience rather than a realization, and people often get attached to ususual experiences. The question that a ND sage might ask someone who considered NS necessary is, "Who is it that experiences NS?" The answer to that question would likely reveal whether any significant realizations have resulted from experiencing NS. Since full Awakening which is Self-realization is nirvikalpa samadhi become sahaja samadhi, it's unavoidable to experience nirvikalpa even if it's only experienced once without any prior practice as was the case with Ramana Maharshi. In his case he experienced nirvikalpa which instantaneously became sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi or SR. It is impossible for me to know if the people you have mentioned are Self-realized so I can't make any comparisons. Paul Morgan-Somers talks a lot about the ocean. That is nirvikalpa. It doesn't mean there isn't NS just because the word isn't used or if there is a different way of describing it If you put it that way, it sounds a bit like Spira declaring enlightenment as just another word for happiness. We have to be very precise with our language here. Samadhi is a state, an experience. SR is not a state, not an experience. So by definition, NS cannot be SR. As ZD already mentioned, NS is not a requirement for SR and NS does not automagically result in SR. As a case in point, there are several members here who have indicated that they have a reference for NS but at the same time show no reference whatsoever for SR. SR should not be confused with the various states that may or may not accompany SR. In that sense, SR is always the same realization, but there's great variety in terms of how this can play out, individually, as an experience. And it could indeed happen the way you described it, but it doesn't have to and more often than not doesn't, because the basic formula for liberation is much simpler and much more basic than the formula you have given. So, you're not wrong. But you make it seem more complicated than it actually is. However, I think in terms of final result, we've always been in agreement. |
|
True! Though one thing I wanted to clarify about what you mentioned re: the "Christian koan" of everything being God's will... you said therefore the only free will would be whether or not you (freely) chose to accept God's love? I assume that means accepting whatever is the case in the moment, since that is God's will? Or did you mean something else?
