dwai

Admin
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    8,286

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

Everything posted by dwai

  1. Yes
  2. It seems that mind (thinking mind) is "heavier" than energy and we use in our style of tai chi to counterbalance the energy. Also our everyday experience says that we can experience our mind (thoughts, emotions, feelings) far more palpably than we can energy (ie speaking from a lay person's point of view).
  3. Manas is the field/stream of thoughts, emotions and feelings. So in it, there are both yin and yang. Yet compared to the body mind is more insubstantial. Compared to energy the mind is more substantial. And so on... yin-yang is a meta-physical principle. You can find it in anything.
  4. For someone who has never experienced, and yet "given up" something, there seems to be something amiss. What did you have in the first place that you have given up? One (none of the attainments need to be given up) is from the point of view of "completeness of the human experience". The other (sanyasa) is after one has a complete human experience. It is not unusual to find someone living in a cave in the Himalayas and yet racked in the throes of passion and desire. It is also not unusual to find someone living amidst materialism of the highest degree and yet remaining untouched by it. True renunciation is of the mind. So long as one identifies with the contents of the mind, there cannot be renunciation. When one has ceased identifying with the contents of the mind, everything is an act of a renunciate.
  5. In the traditional system, the Sanyasi takes sanyasa after going through the first 3 āshramas. So, he/she has already experienced the first three purushārthas. Also, Sanyasa isn't particularly about strict vows and responsibilities, in as much as it is about giving up personal history. The Sanyasi will do his/her own last rites, which involves giving up of all ties to the world (including parents, family, possessions, etc).
  6. I think the Varnāshrama concept in Hindu dharma is very important to keep in mind. Also, the four purushārthas. The four pillars of human existence (per Sanātana Dharma) are -- Dharma Artha Kāma Mōksha The four āshramas are -- Brahmachārya (Student life/celibacy, study the dharma) Grihasta (Householder/family, live the dharmic way) vānahprastha (Forest dweller/retired to contemplate on the dharma) Sanyāsa (Renunciate - attain liberation) All actions must be done on the basis of Dharma, but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected. Not everyone is cut out for the renunciate's lifestyle at an early age. Normally the vairāgya that arises from going through the cycle of the four āshramas is a natural outcome of the human condition, and progressively *SHOULD* point the individual towards Self-realization. But that doesn't work anymore and always was an idealized, culture-specific way of life, in Hindu India. Yet, the concepts can be applied universally (and we see a similar approach naturally arising, at least till Grihastāshrama, in all cultures.
  7. One topic that comes up in the Advaita Vedanta circles is ā€œhow can one be in the world and still abide as the Self?ā€. This is a loaded topic and depends on the stage the individual is at. If one is in the stage of realizing the ineherent ā€œemptinessā€ of phenomena (jagat mithya), that evokes (and is predicated on) a progressively increasing detachment (Vairāgya). Then one goes to the point of realizing what is it that is Real (brahma satyam ā€” or Brahman). At this stage Brahman is considered reality and world an appearance. The individual (jiva) and his world seems unreal and nonexistent. The detachment becomes stronger. Then the final understanding happens - Jiva brahmaiva nāparāha) - jiva is none other than brahaman itself. That the Self of the jiva is Brahman (Atman IS NONE OTHER THAN Brahman). This gives rise to a great love. Unconditional love for the world. How can one be a renunciate in the normal sense of the word anymore? Everything is verily my own Self. From here rises selfless action, service and love. A householder js in a unique situation. He/she can continue living in the world and yet not be of it. He/she can fulfill all social duties without vacillating between desires and suffering.
  8. My friend and I were discussing this. His position was that there is a sudden and clear awakening which is complete and irreversible and with it comes great clarity about the true nature and the falsity of stories. In my experience, it can be a gradual process of letting go of identities and positions after waking up to our true nature. In the process, there is a vacillation, a swinging of the pendulum to and from clarity/presence and samsara. This continues as long as there are vāsanās, with each clearing a vāsanā is dissolved, and eventually a new one arises to be dissolved/let go. I even know of a few people who woke up via tai chi, but without having adequate words to logically explain what was happening, were suffering as a result of being stuck with the misidentification with the personalities (how one is expected to behave and act while playing roles of spouse, parent, child, sibling, friend, member of society, etc). There are two parts to the waking up, I feel. One is the Direct apperception and the other the framework knowledge. Sometimes the normal sequence of framework knowledge -> understanding -> contemplation -> meditation -> awakening is not followed. It could be awakening + framework knowledge -> understanding -> contemplation -> meditation
  9. That which Awakens is always awake, always there. I attended a 3 day retreat on The Mandukya Upanishad, which shows us the nonduality inherent in our everyday experience, right here and right now, by pointing to something that underlies our everyday experiences of waking, dreaming and deep sleep. To try an exercise as an experiment (I've seen Papaji do this and it worked for me), for anyone who wants to try ie. -- Try and see who you are, in a fraction of a second, without thinking. Don't try to guess what the answer will be, but in YOUR EXPERIENCE, see who you are, without thinking. What do you get? More to follow afterwards.
  10. I propose that further more, that the brain itself is a creation of awareness
  11. Its just logic.
  12. The big question is, will the AI be conscious? Self-aware? A simple experiment of whether our bodies are able to perceive "us" is by holding up a palm pointed at one's face. Is there a remote chance that you'll find your palm looking at you, rather than you looking at your palm? (I'm excluding conditions such as being high on drugs etc).
  13. It is an effort at exploring and it's good. If we perceive we have bodies, doesn't that mean that we are somehow ontologically separate from them (bodies)? Now, one might very well argue that "is it even possible to exist without a body?". That is a matter for another discussion. Yet, experientially, when we get to the "what is" without thinking, it seems to exist without any attributes - hence independent of body, mind, etc. Just alive, being. Is it not so?
  14. What attribute of that which is before the mind arises can we know? Does it have attributes at all? If so, where is the "body" really? If something is to be known, we must be able to find its attributes. Label it, categorize it. That "what is" cannot be labeled or categorized, except via negativa.
  15. I don't understand all this "mid-brain, logic looping, higher centers" etc...those are just conceptual things to me. I understand awareness/being and knowing. When we only focus on knowing, we forget being. Getting caught up in knowing, and being neglected, we jump through many hoops to find out how to just be When my awareness illuminates my mind (an instrument for knowing), it activates my sensory apparatuses (my whole body). With it, I supposedly interact with a world. But all the interaction seems to happen only in awareness (the place of experience). I found out that "trying to find out" usually is the work of dissection. We try to take stuff apart to see what makes it tick. But that doesn't work for awareness. It is impossible to find out how awareness works, because in order to do that, we need awareness. How do we know we have eyes? By the experience of seeing of course! How do we know what we are? By going down to the basic impulse that exists as pure being. It is from there any knowing is possible.
  16. Indeed...who "feels" pain? Awareness or the body?
  17. Beautiful
  18. What constitutes attenuating its noise to a significant degree? Can you try another experiment? With all your attention, wait for a thought to rise in your mind. Watch your mind like a cat might watch for a mouse. Tell me what you get?
  19. But what cognizes that there is "nothing to be aware of, including awareness"?
  20. Who observes that?
  21. Any sense that you exist at all there? Just existence? Being?
  22. Is it gone or just hidden behind the "definitions"?
  23. Is it the consciousness that rushes in to fill the void or is it your mind?
  24. So would it be fair to say that the sense organs gather sensory input, and that gets processed by the mind in form of objects and something (consciousness) makes sense of these thought objects by pattern matching and labeling them as x, y or z?
  25. Why do we need to speculate? I'm not interested in the physiological process. At a high level, can we say one perceives because one has sense organs?