Unconditioned

I agree, we have to be careful not to try to exclude form once we discover formlessness. It is there, there is no intrinsic harm to thinking or symbols. Once we realize that the symbol is not the reality, symbols are symbols and the thing is the thing, it's just what is, where's the harm? When we're caught up in the forms and mistake that for the only reality we're missing the other part. When we're caught in formless and mistake that for the only reality we're missing the other part. Thought and symbols are beautiful tools that we're lucky to have. They're like fire which can be used to light a room, heat a home, or to destroy, devastate but it is what it is, we're just adding (figuratively) our conditioned impression to these tools - and that's ok too, that's what us humans tend to do A lot of people will probably disagree but if you look at all the technology and 'form' achievements throughout humanity it is one of the most beautiful things especially when we understand how it's all come into being. Edit: so what is the value of debate? I'm not a fan of debate because it typically turns into my view vs. your view. My conditioning vs. your conditioning which is really silly when you take a look at it from that perspective. Discussion and exploration, questions that continue with no concrete answers, that seems to be valuable in the sense that it is less likely to strengthen the false ego-identification. They're a temporary aid, like a match stick used to light a fire - once the fire is burning, we don't need the match stick anymore.

Welcome Hugo! I'm not a big tea drinker but that aside "feelings" is a very deep topic and I personally think it gets overlooked in many traditions that are more intellectual such as Zen (there are others but that's the first that came to mind). I generally tend to be intellectual and stoic so I'm interested in exploring emotions/feelings a bit. I'll add a few questions for now and see where the conversation goes... What are emotions? Are they important/needed? Why? Can emotions bring us closer to our 'true nature/self'? What causes an emotion? For example, why do we get angry when we're stuck in traffic? Are emotions strictly tied to pleasure and pain? Meaning do we only feel positive emotions when feeling pleasure and negative emotions when feeling pain? Are emotions just another idea/concept or is there more to it than that? Those are just a few off the top of my head, I'm sure there are better questions but thought maybe we could start here...

With increasing frequency but still a long way to go...damn it, looks like that whole future idea is still playing games with me... crap, and that idea of 'still playing' means I'm still caught in the past a bit too, but that's being human for ya! And to clear one thing up (at least from my point of view) the past is just a collection of fragmented memories that fade over time and are conditioned by the past prior to that. The future is just an idea of what we think things can/should/will/etc be like also conditioned by the past. The now is the space-time in which everything exists in reality, including the thought forms of past and future. Just my 2c per usual

Or broods arguments and division. All a matter of perspective It's easy to get roped in to the argument but I agree with evZENy - why? The context of the discussion gets lost just a few posts in and it turns into my view vs. your view instead of an exploration. So is that really helping anyone? It's just strengthening our attachment to our system and our sense of being right. Then it turns into a match to try to bring the other to our side of the argument. Constructive exploration is one thing, trying to prove your point vs. another is destructive (imo).

I have a bit of a different take on how to practice the self-inquiry method that Ramana taught. I think of it as a 'top-down' approach and similar to what others have said as you inquire "Who am I?" it leads to other questions. Am I my body? Am I my sensations? (I can feel my body who is feeling it?) Am I my thoughts? Am I the one observing the thoughts, sensations, body? For me, I examined each of these questions deeply. Not in a 'no i'm not my body because ______ teacher says we're not for ______ reason'. I drew my own conclusions based on direct experience and the desire for an honest, true, answer. For example, when questioning if I were my sensations, I would focus my attention on them in a very alert way. I would touch things and see what was happening in me, I would feel what was going on. This approach may not be for everyone but for me personally it challenged my conclusions on what I am which started me on my spiritual path. Ultimately these questions are a negation technique. If you know everything you are not, then what is left is what you are. The questioning allowed me to become aware of my own awareness, aware that we have the ability to be aware. When I saw this for the first time it was the most beautiful thing I've ever come across. The ability to be aware of awareness is a gift to us and it's amazing when you see what possibilities that has opened for us (humans). Specifically the question that lead me there was "How am I able to feel/think all these things? How is it possible to know I'm thinking?" Then, just like when you figure out a riddle, out of nowhere the realization that we can be aware of our awareness came in. All the best, Nate

I'm halfway through the power of now and have watched a few of his talks on youTube. For me the way he phrased certain things lead to many 'ah hah' moments. He brings you straight to the point without trying to describe it and gives very simple but effective ways to get in touch with awareness/consciousness. I'm always amazed when I hear something said a slightly different way and it resonates so clearly then I look back and smack myself on the forehead for not getting it the first time. Just my 2c. MY Life after death - to me this has always come across as a defense mechanism for the ego. "I'll never die! I'll just go on in another form". In this sense I mean the "I" and "me" to be the historical record of events that we can recall (and even our recollection is tainted through conditioning). If that's the case I've had a hard time believing that for many reasons the first being that you are not your memories nor are you your thoughts, those are tied to the body (memory and thoughts in the brain) and we're aware of them though conscioiusness. We are life, we are alive. Life continues after our bodies die, therefor 'we', as life, continue on. But, the form we're currently in takes other forms, mostly as worm and plant food.. that can make a tree grow, that can produce an apple, that another person can eat and gain energy from, etc. etc. Just more color commentary...

1. Xuesheng 2. Mal 3. Taomeow 4. Rain 5. Goldisheavy In no particular order. I like this thread because if your name is on the list it's an ego check, if your name is not on the list it's also an ego check. Good stuff

Very interesting indeed, I see what you're getting at with the 'underlying formless' as something not to be caught in. I think I had interpreted it personally in a different way than traditional A.V. in that it must be not seen as something absolute. That could be seen as another way of saying 'I know the unknown', fat chance. Thanks for the reminder on the nothing added or removed, I've even posted that a few times around here! I'm honestly not sure whether there is a unified formless from which all the unique forms arise or an interdependent form-formless. But I am certain that my head is spinning And zeal to spread a technique for THE liberation (vs. 'your' liberation) still leaves a bad-taste with me since I see this as one of the main causes for division and violence in humanity. But none the less I've felt some internal agitation during these conversations which is a good indication of clinging that I might not have otherwise noticed, all good stuff, thanks for the conversation and taking the time to explain.

Interesting, then I disagree with the Buddha's actions of debating against other's method's towards liberation. But it can also be interpreted as him debating with people of those traditions who were caught in the dogma and didn't understand what they were pointing at. Even the Buddha said (in so many words) not to just accept his teachings. My impression of the Buddha is that he wouldn't go around telling everyone else their wrong and he's right. Anyway, interesting topic none the less and my last post on it since I'm not here to convince anyone of anything, just to contribute.

Isn't that the same thing as when a Buddhist refers to D.O.? Aren't we're arguing over the label to a 'no-thing'? Vedanta doesn't believe there is a THING that superimposes when using the Brahman label (and if they do they're delusional). Just as Buddhists don't believe there is a THING superimposed when talking about D.O. (and if they do they're delusional too). I see the point about the subtly between the descriptions but the same point can be made about the Buddhist descriptor as well, no? Both can be looked at as 'things' or as references.

Very well said, traditions aside, that is the truth of the matter. The concept of no-concepts needs to be let go of too. The concepts of dependent origination, emptiness, void, truth, Tao, reality, all pointers that need to be let go of. However, one size doesn't fit all. There are many people from many paths that have reached the same 'conclusion'. So while I agree with the Buddha's teaching I don't agree that his method is the only one that works. So I believe that to say his teachings are THE Supreme teaching is a matter of opinion. I can use a hammer, a screw, or a nail to hold a board in place. The end result is the same but then we start discussing that a threaded screw is more secure than a thin nail and that doesn't help keep the board in place. A rough analogy that will likely be pulled apart (proving my point) but it's close enough

I hear showering and brushing your teeth are good places to start

I'll just toss my 2c in for kicks here as I've come up from both a Buddhist and A.V. background but am not for or against either one. I look at the idea of Brahman as the same as the emptiness. However, even with emptiness one must go beyond that (the emptiness of emptiness). So we can use Brahman and emptiness in a similar way although both have much different contexts and traditions surrounding them. A label that doesn't carry so much weight might be "unmanifest"... still doesn't quite get it but then again no label can. By 'abiding' and 'refuge' do you mean not identifying your sense experiences as a 'self' entity and acting from awareness as opposed to acting from conditioning? And of course the are infinite mind-streams, from the perspective of form, they are there but the identification of 'me' with those mind-streams is the misidentification so they are essentially empty. But, to be completely honest, I do not see the benefit to debating traditions. The representation from each side will likely be biased and argue their point over the other's. It is the false identification with conditioned thoughts that cause the argument and defensive positions, not the traditions themselves. "I KNOW I'm right! They are wrong!" is a function of the egoic mind, a trick to strengthen itself and it's hold over our awareness, consciousness, energy, whatever word you give it...

Very interesting, I sometimes wonder why I'm on these boards debating too! Where does it really lead? Thoughts, more thoughts, more ego, I'm right your wrong... wait maybe you are right, I'll add that to myself, now I'm better than i was a few moments ago, etc. etc. Accept, reject, grasp, grasp, wait don't grasp, oh crap I'm grasping at not grasping. That's a lot of what I see here, in myself, and implied in some of the posts. Check how defensive we can get, that's a good indication we still think we have a persona No ill will intended, just thought this was a good opportunity to point out an observation.

I think it's a matter of perception. In the west we tend to be more masculine (although you can make an argument the other way too) so it may seem as though there is MORE yin in the TTC. It's an interesting observation though and I'm actually pretty happy that no one has tried to argue that one is BETTER than the other, very good stuff Formless Yin is only one half, it's the space between the Yang. Can't have one without the other. As others have said, it's a balance between the two, or perhaps a balance underneath the two. I see the circle when looking at the Yin/Yang symbol. Within that there are the labels Yin and Yang. The whole structure contains both and both make up the structure. What are you left with? What IS. That's about as descriptive as I can get and even then words don't work like I want them to.

While your teacher is pointing in the right direction, it seems so obscure that it leaves you guessing - "how"? It's our natural inclination, we're conditioned to want to do something about the 'problem', we want to take action right away. Working in business, I've learned that in order to solve a problem you have to understand it first. If you can start to understand what your teacher is telling you, you'll find the answer with little or no practice. The statement reminds me of "Who am I?" by Ramana Maharishi. Now all that said, my 'practice' has had little to do with physical practices but more of a "what is this stuff?" science type approach. Best of luck!

If it happens, it happens. I'm not going to resist it, or expend my energy trying to do so. That may seem disrespectful towards my own life and it even may be but I'm betting on my lack of ability to stop nature from taking it's course. So it would be a waste of my (lack of) time. I can see why others would be prepared though and am not judging either way. Now, talk to me if I see a big asteroid, or tidal wave approaching and I might have a different story

So I don't usual post solicitation for advice but I'd like to help my fiance from an 'aware' point of view rather than a strictly logical point of view - my typical, conditioned, helping-method. I'm a logical thinker and she's much more emotional so we tend to have a rift when things get tough for her. I've tried to show her that the problems she's facing aren't as bad as they seem but that comes off to her as cold and uncaring. She's very clingy and was out with some new friends that are very independent. Long story short they were busting her chops about her calling me a couple of times while they were out having a good time and she's taken it very personally, it's stirred up past memories/emotions/depression. So, does anyone have suggestions on how to help someone without just giving them solutions to problems or minimizing their problems? Pain can be a great teacher so I don't know if it's a good idea to let her work through the suffering or to try to help her through it. Maybe a female perspective could help here? In general I'm finding it very difficult to try to help people with their problems (from being a friend standpoint, I'm not looking to be a psychologist). Thanks for the comments in advance, -Nate

Thank you all for the wise advice. It turns out she just needed to know that someone was there for her rather than being judged or offered up solutions (for this particular case). Showing her confidence and that I care about her was much more effective than saying "you'll be fine, all things come to an end, etc." She needed to feel it, not hear it is my guess. In either case, I really do appreciate the advice so thank you.

No maaaan, I'm THE DUDE! Great movie, and great point about UG. There's a video on youTube with some of his last words and they're so negative. He seems to get caught up in the "nothingness" of Everything and tends to under emphasize the everything aspect - at least in my limited observation.

So last night I chose to celebrate cinco de mayo with some friends and got in a bit late. I woke up very tired this morning and all day I've been strongly identified with my thoughts/body/ego/etc. However, when I had a good night's sleep a few days ago, I was very alert/aware mentally and even though it was a tough day I was unaffected by the external circumstances. So my question is this: under fatigue is it possible to remain in a hightened state of awareness even though the external challenges may be greater? Or is it essential that in order to not get caught up in the dream (so to speak) the body needs to be well rested and in good health?

Wow, that hit home for me... tired or not our energy levels may vary but we're still conscious... very good point.

It may be a phantom but it's still there no less. And what is it? Just a reflection of the external. And what is the external? Just a reflection of the internal. So what does that mean?

Good point about being aware... I have a hard time describing what I mean by that. I'll try though, in the state of no thought our BEing is not caught up in anything... that is the state that I refer to as being 'aware'. I don't like to add a noun to that Aware of _____ because it ends up being an object of the mind. So after lack of sleep, I notice that it's more difficult (personally) to be calm and in the no-thought state. Even when trying to meditate after lack of sleep or fatigue I find it much more difficult to resist the temptation of associating my BEing with my thoughts/emotions/etc. I'm guessing that it is very possible to not make that choice when tired but it also seems much easier to get caught in thoughts when tired. Could this have to do with lack of energy when the body isn't properly cared for? Does anything i'm saying make any sense at all? lol.

I'll throw in my "not even close logically, mentally, or spiritually" comment on this discussion. I agree with gold in that what we THINK we perceive is added to our experiencing and what we THINK we experience is added to the perceiving. Experiencing and perceiving are pure in their own right, we add our past and projected future to the reality and distort it. However, the labels, concepts, etc. that we use are still there. They cannot be excluded from reality but they can be understood to be empty in and of themselves. And if we try to exclude anything from everything that IS we're delusional and ignorant (I use those words without attaching any connotation). So, to label, to conceptualize, to imagine, is to be human. To realize that those abilities are baseless and not seperate is our gift. I think that is what you (gold) were saying here: Nonetheless a very interesting discussion... even if it is in a language that makes my brain hurt Edit: After rereading I've realized that I cannot effectively use words Nothing can be added or taken away, that's only a metaphor. I just have no other means of clearly explaining what I mean. Some days I really like Ramana's approach - silence. But then there are those among us who have a way to use a medium which is by nature divisive to explain something that cannot be divided (and I stole those words from someone else). Also, I don't fell the need to say this but I will anyway out of compulsion. When reading posts, it's very telling when we become defensive of what the other person is saying. It's our spiritual nervous system saying "there's something going on here!!". To that point, if we can get past what we think the poster's hidden agenda is and not judge the content I think we'd have more constructive conversation.