dwai

There's really no "mystery" that is being used to shroud what is everyone's core being anyway. What is missing is a readiness to understand what the ancients have already laid out as simple processes. With our modern penchant for complexity in the form of technology, we forget that the knowledge of the Self is in the realm of knowledge and requires no technology per se. It is another matter that we have processes that take us to the Self discovery via many seemingly divergent paths. I'm all for making this information available...but I suspect it won't be of any use until people become ready for the knowledge. We have a saying in India "the monkey doesn't know the taste of ginger..." or alternately, without going through the karmic rules, knowledge is going to be akin to a cumin seed in a camel's mouth (unappreciated)...

Relatively, answer 1 is yes. Absolutlely it is no. If relatively, then yes. If absolutely then any help is a result of the Self seeking to unveil itself. So while the help works in the dualistic world sense, it is of no consequence in the nondual...

Yet all siddhis are considered just side attractions to the main thing Please don't get me wrong when I mentioned "abrahamic". I'm well aware of the mystical traditions therein (and also the general reception they got historically...and they were the folks who "got it")... Based on what I've learnt and have been taught, there is no "volition" left as there is no limited being left. So there is no "ruler" aside from that One nondual Self. If there are other "individual" beings then the are back in duality. Some masters like Babaji do exist, but he too is nothing but the swarupa of the unlimited...and not a separate "individual" ( as all are in him).

The reigning/ruling thing seems too literal an interpretation imho. That's my issue with abrahamic religions in general - to want to have "dominion"...just seems misguided to me. Why does a being that is "all" need to reign? And over what? His/her own Self (if all is indeed the Self)? That seems to be a dualistic perspective.

Science cannot sustain nonduality as it is not a "state" (even if it can help trigger it). For anyone to stabilize in nonduality implies a background in knowledge (Jnana) needs to be mature. Not half-baked quasi-intelligible mumbo-jumbo. Also there is already "science" in the form of daoist, Hindu and Buddhist frameworks that provide this. I guess what is being attempted is to fulfill the modern penchant for instant gratification...a bad idea in the dualistic world and a definitely a bad idea when dealing with nonduality. I'm going to venture and say all we'll get out of these "scientific methods" are some very confused and discombobulated dualistic beings...

I think it (understanding) happens in layers. Some of it is intuitive. Others are predicated on experience. Somethings we intuit at one stage we can corroborate experientially. Over the years what i had intuited from spotless' words, some I had already experienced and some I did experience later. It is a constant process of unfolding (as I find spotless saying)... Sometimes these words plant seeds unknown to the mind...and flower in the darkness of the subconscious.

I think both perspectives are simply perspectives. The ultimate is not aware of being aware in the same way the sun is not aware of illumination. But it is pure awareness. I used to try to differentiate awareness and consciousness in some acrobatic mode of the intellect, but really they are the same. The biggest problem is syntactical imho, and is bound to cause contradictions and paradoxes when we try to articulate the indescribable. That which is simultaneously nothing and everything (as pure potentiality) contains all perspectives and descriptions within itself. But is not absolutely any one of these. This is what Neti neti is trying to convey imho. What Jeff is trying to express is that there is a volitinary action that is taken by a realized mind-body complex to become like a "bodhisattva", out of compassion (not for anyone is general but because compassion is his/her nature now). My take on what one would call a jeevanmukta or zhenren is one who takes no action on his/her own volition. Yet all action/non-action happens as needed/not needed. This is imho what jeff is getting at. Yet I feel that for a jeevanmukta there are only happenings as he/she is already free of the personality. Therefore they are empty and free...not attached to any position, they can be infinite or nothing as the need arises in the dualistic world. In the absolute sense they are pure being! That being said, would the "nonvolition" of the sage not be the volition of the absolute/Brahman/Dao? There is no volition in the relative sense because the relative being is not there anymore. But what seem like happenings are also the doing of the Self itself. So there it is the volition of the pure self...

Sink the qi into the lower dan tien, gently. Don't do it so hard that you give yourself a headache. Your mind can rest on your lower dan tien just like you can just lay your hand on a table top. Rest your mind there and imagine a tiny hole the size of a needle tip in your dan tien where your qi sinks into. You can use visualization if you can't feel your LDT well enough...like a spiral going into the LDT (how water spirals when you drain a bath tub). Go very slowly - if it takes 5 mins, let it. We should always do this to bring the qi back into the LDT after we practice...

Id strongly recommend this book - https://www.amazon.com/Restoring-Your-Life-Energy-Well-Being/dp/1590309960/ref=la_B001K8IR56_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1485632880&sr=1-4 There are mother forms in this book that are used for temple style tai chi advanced practices such as Dao Gong. But themselves these forms are excellent qigong forms too...easy to learn and will yield results very rapidly.

I think becoming aware of the witness is the first step. That can be done by doing any repetitive task for an extended period of time...

That makes sense. In fact in my meditations I often see two women...one looks like she's part of my family but I've never seen her in my life (prior to the meditations). I sense great love and benevolence from her. The other is a short-haired tantrik female, whose eyes are piercing and like laser beams. She too seems benevolent. Finally, when my mind settles in the Guru chakra, I see a female body...mainly a right arm with a golden ornament that is like a tape that wraps up from her wrist to the lower forearm.

Please do share if it's not too much trouble for you.

Thanks for elaborating. I'm going to see how things unfold over the next few days...

I'm not sure I understood. Please elaborate?

You are not alone. That's why we need constant practice. My friend calls it "constant remembrance"...to be constantly aware of who we truly are. I don't know, maybe that's a phase too. It was harder to remember even a few months ago and seems easier now...I think it's a constantly shifting adjustment...

Of course we let go. But I think the "letting go" part is sort of tricky and some conditions need to arise (within the human mind-body construct) that'll trigger the releasing. All I'm saying is, there might be something to the "expand anger to till it disappears" perspective. Would I do it? No. I'll probably get a heart attack and die...but then that could be considered a "realization" part...

My point is that the "realization of the futility of it" is a natural process. It is the natural outcome of letting something expand infinitely in the human context (like emotion, feeling, etc etc). We already know that's how it is for energy...so why is consciousness exempt from this process? After all, consciousness and energy are non-different...

I'd like to think that his anger and sorrow turned into emptiness...In the same way that yang turns into yin naturally... may be...who knows? Emperor Ashoka...the great Buddhist ruler of Ancient India was a blood-thirsty war-mongerer. His blood-lust and lust-for-power became compassion eventually and he converted to Buddhism and preached the Dhamma in repentance for the rest of his life.

Emptiness is Pure Objectless Consciousness. I don't suggest that bit about hatred/anger There is a story in India about something like this though. The author of the Epic Ramayana, was a sage named Valmiki. Before he became a sage, he was a notorious murderous robber named Ratnakar. He had an encounter with a traveling sage in his forest. He would attack travelers passing through the forest he lived in, kill them, and steal their possessions. When he went to attack the traveling sage, the sage stopped him and asked - "Before you kill me, can you answer my one question?" Ratnakar responded "What?" Sage "Can you tell me why you're doing this? Killing people and stealing their belongings?" Ratnakar replied "I have to feed my wife and kids...I have to feed my aging parents. If I don't do this, we will all starve to death!" Sage said "Can you do one thing? Can you go ask your wife and kids and your other dependents, if they will share the bad karma you are earning by killing and looting? I promise you I'll stay right here until you return. Then you can kill me and steal my meager possessions" Ratnakar was mystified. He ran home and asked each of his dependents whether they'd share his negative karma. Each replied that they didn't think they would have to share his bad karma, because he was doing his duty to provide for them. How he did it was entirely his own choice! He ran back to sage with a dejected look on his face. He said "I am at a loss for words. I had thought my family, whom I love and provide for would be willing to share some of my sins...but they refused!" And as he sat in front of the sage, he broke down and cried at the outrage he felt by the betrayal of his loved ones. He asked the sage "If this is the outcome of my murdering and stealing, how do I make amends?" The sage replied - "You have to repent!" Ratnakar said - "How?" Sage said - "Think of a deity you love dearly and just chant his or her name in total devotion..." Ratnakar replied "I've never prayed to any deity and my heart is full of anger and sorrow right now...I can't make room for devotion." Sage asked "Then what do you know?" Ratnakar replied "The only thing I know is to kill...so I know death...Mara" Sage said "Okay then..sit here under this tree and keep chanting Mara..mara...mara...don't get up to eat, sleep, drink...etc...until I come back" Ratnakar was a man of very strong will...he sat down and started chanting "Mara...mara..." The sage went about his business and walked out of the forest. Seven years went by and the sage was passing through through the forest again. He saw there were animals and birds flocking around a huge anthill that had formed around a tree. There was a very peaceful and serene energy around the place. He immediately knew that it was the dreadful Ratnakar who was there. He walked up to the Anthill and slowly dug Ratnakar out. Upon being touched by the sage, Ratnakar came out of his meditation and seeing the sage, fell at his feet in joy and gratitude. He asked the sage "how long has it been since I've been meditating?" The sage replied "It has been at least 7 years..." The sage could tell that there was no vestige of Ratnakar, the dreaded murderer left in the man. He renamed him Valmiki, because he was "born again" from an anthill. Valmiki had to just channelize his anger and sorrow into a single-minded task with his eyes closed and senses turned inward. He did pratyahara, dharana and dhyana. Soon he entered samadhi where he remained until the Sage came and woke him up. So his anger and sorrow became the seed for his enlightenment. The word "Mara" (kill) had become "Rama" (The name of God).

What he is referring to as "lying beyond", is what I (and Advaita Vedanta) calls Pure Objectless Consciousness.

That's a good question... When we finally realize this, it is so obvious...but there is a tendency to forget and lose sight of who/what we really are. That is called Avidya in Vedanta and the mechanism that makes us forget is called Maya. Here's something I'd attempted a few years back (to try and answer this) -- http://www.medhajournal.com/index.php/en/component/content/article/14-columns/philosophy/549-the-maya-and-karma-conundrum I finally decided it's pointless to try to answer "why". It's better to just know the fact and just be...

And yet, when yang reaches it's peak, it becomes yin. And when yin reaches it's peak, it becomes yang. We might say that it is never possible for something to go to infinity as there is always going to be the "opposite" after a certain point. So fullness becomes emptiness after expanding to a certain point. And Emptiness becomes fullness after contracting to a certain point. The two keep transforming into one another. Full and empty are simultaneously coexistent. Only what we choose to see is what we see...I think that is what was being suggested in the article quoted...

The eternal witness is the presence, ime which stands straddling emptiness and the 10,000 things (so to speak). It doesn't have any desires, fears, likes or dislikes. So it is already free. So ultimately, there is no need for enlightenment as that which we seek is already us and already enlightened and free. However, that is not something that just a mere verbal pronouncement or intellectual understanding can make "real" for us, imho. There is still the part where we work towards stilling the mind so we can become aware of the witness...as a noisy mind obscures the witness (or a right tug at the right time stops the mind for us suddenly). We also need to use whatever tools work for us to really know what we are looking for, until we can just be the presence or the witness or "I am" without the noise of the mind, intellect, thoughts etc. It's hard until it becomes easy. Then it is just easy. People think they're doing us a favor by telling us that it's all simple and easy...because they've forgotten how much they themselves must've struggled to get it. My teacher told me this when I started with him...first it'll seem very hard, until you learn how to do it. Then it becomes easy and you'll think back and exclaim "Is this how easy it was?!? Why didn't I get it more easily?"

extreme yin becomes yang and extreme yang becomes yin. And yang also contains a little yin and vice versa. But that too is in the domain of the dualistic world. I was using yin and yang as rhetorical devices, in response to Jeff's point about how limitless something can't lead to a limitless being or emptiness. Scientists today struggle with how the universe sprung forth from a singularity and how from nothing sprung forth the singularity. They posit the Big Bang and a Big Crunch or a big rip. And then they say "the universe arose by chance..." and yet don't recognize the fact that logically, if the universe arose from nothing and went back into nothing again after a crunch or rip, the same conditions exist in potentiality that existed before this universe arose. In fact that potentiality always exists in that "emptiness". Watch this discussion without judgement. Just go along with the discussion and see the outcome -- https://youtu.be/erSd5xep30w