dwai

There used to be the concept of a sub-forum steward, but after the Buddha Bums wars were done, the need for such roles disappeared. For sure, we can’t do everything for everyone. But I do notice that many of our members, especially the “damo army” have stopped being active ever since the member being referred to in the OP started with their contributions.

When the Buddha was on the way to Nirvana, Mara is said to have visited him and tried to incentivize him to quit by offering things or by trying to scare him. A similar process can be seen in the conversation between Nachiketa and Lord Yama in the katha Upanishad, where Yama offers wealth, a very long life, all the pleasures of this realm and higher realms (deva realm), and so on. But young nachiketa’s resolve to find the secret of “immortality” was unshaken, as all those other things would either cease to be, or cease to give pleasure/joy/happiness after a while. This diamond body/rainbow body thing is very interesting for sure, when I meet someone with this capability, I would love to ask them questions about their motivations

The mechanism of the mind and consciousness was very well worked out in ancient Hindu systems. Mind is a composite of four functions, lit up by consciousness. In a sense “the mind” is like a mirror, on which consciousness shines, and it in turn reveals “objects”. The “hard problem of consciousness” is hinged on a basic assumption that matter is the fundamental component of reality. But even our mundane experience says otherwise. There is really no way to substantially prove that there’s a reality “out there” — all knowing/phenomenal knowledge is happening in consciousness, with the mind itself. In the Shiva sutras, Lord Shiva says, “I can pack all the matter in your universe into a space smaller than available in a single mustard seed”. I find the entire proposition of matter-based reality a bit infantile, much to the chagrin of my scientist friends.

The mind experiences. What makes experience possible? Consciousness. Consciousness IS NOT an emergent property of matter. Matter is an emergent phenomenon in and from consciousness. To be able to recognize the true nature of our Self as Consciouness, the mind needs to be calmed. I think we’ve all heard the metaphor of a lake with turbulence in the water. When the turbulence stops, the lake “settles” and the lake bed can be clearly seen. Similarly with the mind - when the turbulence of the mind (yoga calls it chitta vritti or modifications of the mind) is stopped, one can see one’s true nature as consciousness/awareness. One way to calm the mind is by focusing the prana/qi. I’m sharing my own journey below fwiw, take it as you deem fit. In my own experience, when I first started to read vedanta, I wasn’t able to focus my mind enough, to get the breakthrough of what is being pointed towards. So I followed the path of qi/Prana and mantra. This happened for about 17 years Over a period of time, a “witness” arose, first during practice, and eventually spilling over into all aspects of my life. With it came many mini “a-ha” moments, when suddenly a very obscure or seemingly complicated/cryptic piece of text that I’d studied earlier made sense. My mind was becoming more tranquil and disciplined. So these “energy-based” systems are preparatory, in the sense that they prepare the mind for nondual knowledge and eventually realization. Realization doesn’t occur because of these systems, but upon being pointed to by a guide (teacher or text - knowledge). For me the “big breakthrough” started when my teacher shared presence with me (can call it a shaktipat). When that happened, the witness which was previously coming and going became permanently split into two. There was the monkey mind, and there was the silent witness which observed all the happenings. In vedanta this is pointed to with the teaching of two birds on a tree branch. One is busy eating the fruit (monkey mind), while the other quietly observes (the witness). Whenever I gravitated towards identification with the monkey mind, all troubles started. When I stayed as the witness, there was complete and total peace, tranquility, even amidst the most trying of situations. At this point, I was more than happy to just continue my practice and quietly live my life. But a friend with a very piercing intellect, who was interested in vedanta, started engaging me in debates and discussions on the subject of enlightenment. At that point I revisited the upanishads again — just so I could use a frame of reference that he was used to. Much to my surprise, I understood everything that was being referred to. And as I studied them more, I ran into teachers who were elucidating the teachings written in cryptic Vedic Sanskrit in layman terms, which set in motion the process of vedantic study - shravana (hearing), manana (contemplation) and nidhidhyasana (marinating in the knowledge), eventually culminating in a direct flash of recognition/realization. When that happened, all I could do was sit and laugh for days together, at irony of being the seeker, whose “prize” was always present, and never ever really obscured at all. Every time the personality made a grand appearance, it would evoke great mirth, as the great pretender/appropriator (the ego). That which was the serious sufferer, victim, hero, villain of the stories it tried to make and uphold, became clearly transparent. All it’s actions became clear as those of a toddler trying to draw the attention of an adult. Three things fell away consequently - guilt, self-judgment/loathing and fear. Also what became clear as day, is that not a single “person” isn’t already that Consciousness. The world is an appearance of that very consciousness, in itself. Did that make me a saint? No. Why do I need to become one? I am not a teacher, but a householder in this particular story. So I share in groups where it makes sense to share — no one has an exclusive claim on that which is already and ever-present. Everything is perfect, just as it is. The process of refinement is of old patterns slowly losing their power. Some have disappeared, others come and go. But the unshakeable knowledge of one’s true nature remains.

Consciousness, Being, Fullness

Of course. Though holy/unholy, pure/impure, freedom/bondage are also dualistic notions. They are meaningful only to the dualistic mind. Atman is beyond all duality. This is a very common thing — mostly people prefer one thing over another. They avoid some thing over another. This is called raga-dvesha or craving-aversion. They go hand in hand. And this is the root of suffering. What we like, we cling to. What we dislike, we run from. The entire lives of many is spent in this chasing/clinging/avoiding cycle. More we resist change, the more the mind suffers. Nondual realization neutralizes this raga-dvesha. But also, thinning of this raga-dvesha is called detachment, and detachment/dispassion towards the phenomenal world is one of the hallmarks of a genuine seeker. Humans are typically hedonistic in nature. Which is following the natural tendency of the mind to acquire more things, experiences, etc. This is the path of pravritti or outward expansion. What is needed for spiritual and more so nondual realization is the reversal or nivritti, aka prtayahara in yogic terminology. So one has to start by recognizing the nature of their mind. Then one can actively start redirecting the mind to going back inward, meditating and contemplating on the nature of the mind. And eventually nondual realization will arise. So someone who has realized, is able to withstand the afflictions of nature without reacting to them in the way a normal dualistic person would. That’s why nondual realization negates suffering. Pains and pleasures will continue based on the lifestyle and environment of the individual body-mind. One doesn’t become a super human in the sense that one can gain superpowers through this. Yes it can be confusing, if we start form a place of resistance. If you see the whole world as your own being, love is the natural outcome. That is the compassion sterling mentions. But the first thing to do is prepare one’s own mind to allow nondual realization to arise. Those who continue to chase after other goals, in secular as well as spiritual life, will have to return again, and again, and again...until they finally get it. That IS the game (That is the law of nature).

Personality will continue in some form, as long as the body continues. That personality continues doesn’t affect the Self knowledge. What the nondualist is actually saying is — the desire to be holy, pure, free etc is pointless. You already are, and always have been free. You are not the personality, so why crave for the personality’s likes and dislikes. Be free of the personality’s whims.

Atman doesn’t . The personality does. What would you, bindi prefer? An agitated mind or a peaceful mind? A mind filled with anger and hatred or a mind filled with joy and love? Atman is perfect as it is. Nothing needs to be developed. These are all already present and palpably knowable, right here and right now. We all “experience” the anandamaya kosha in deep sleep every night (except the insomniacs). There is no mystical aspect to these koshas. Every time you make a decision, you experience the vijnanamaya kosha. Every time you have a thought, you experience the manomaya kosha. Every time you take a breath, you experience the pranamaya kosha. The only delusion there is, is of not recognizing our true nature as being that Atman — consciousness, spotless and ever free.

And how does one know the heart state?

can you share the source? Who’s the author? And this doesn’t disprove anything I wrote about the Atman. Yes, the equanimous state of the mind is still a state of the mind. That which knows this state, like all others, or even the state of absence of objects as in deep sleep or nirvikalpa samadhi, that is the Atman.

Atman simply cannot be experienced! If someone claims they “experienced atman”, they are simply wrong. Atman IS consciousness itself. How can it be experienced with any senses or the mind? What people can describe are the states of the mind (empty mind, ecstatic mind, blissful mind, peaceful mind, joyful mind, happy mind, sad mind, and so on). And there are no “different types” of consciousness. There is simply consciousness, illuminating the mind and it’s objects.

There IS no manas consciousness, anadamaya consciousness and so on. There is only consciousness. Anything you can experience is not the Atman.

One Ring to school them all One Ring to no-mind them One Ring to unite them all And in the emptiness rewind them

I’m awake you’re awake stop pretending drop defending tattoos and ink gone in a blink and the rainbow bloke disappears in a puff of smoke

Is it that the "non-dualist" perspective is actually "supremacist", or is it perceived that way due to attachment to "dualist" perspectives? Non-dual is where duality dissolves. It is natural for the ego to resist things that threaten it. It is also common to consider "Non-dual" realization as some fancy, over-the-top new thing one has to develop/grow/acquire. But the fact is, it is most common and ordinary - so much so, that most don't recognize it. There is a story in the Upanishads to express this in 'dualistic' terms, often shared by Swami Sarvapriyananda -- There was once was a prince of a powerful kingdom in India. When he was in his early twenties, he discovered a portrait of a young girl in the cellar of his palace. The portrait was titled "Princess of Kashi", and dated to a date that corresponded with his own age. The girl was very beautiful, and his mind took to flights of fancy, and thought "If she was so beautiful back then, how lovely must she be now?" And with that, he fell deeply and madly in love with this girl. Weeks passed, and he started moping around the palace -- his mother, the Queen was concerned and asked the prime minister to inquire as to what had happened to turn the usually cheerful, dynamic prince into a moping, depressed individual. The Minister found the opportunity to catch the prince in one of his reveries, and asked him, "Sire! What bothers you? You seem so depressed and sad!" The Prince told him about how he was head-over-heels in love with the Princess of Kashi, and that he wouldn't find happiness in his life until he made her his wife. The wise Minister was a part of the royal court since before the prince was born, so he knew a lot about the goings on. He asked the prince, "where did you see/hear about this princess?" To that the prince replied, "I found her portrait in the Cellar, with some old stuff stored there." The minister accompanied the prince to see that portrait. Upon seeing it, he told the prince, "O Prince, you should sit down for what I'm about to tell you." The prince was puzzled, but sat down. The minister then told him, "O Prince..when you were 4 years old, there was a royal play staged in the court. Her Majesty the queen asked that you be dressed as the princess of Kashi, because they weren't able to find a suitable child from the nobility who could play the part. So, you played the role of the Princess of Kashi in that play. To commemorate that, the royal artist was commissioned to create your portrait as that Princess of Kashi. Now, seventeen years later, the one you have fallen in love with, is none other than you, yourself O Lord!" What do you think happened to the Prince and his depression/desperate love for the princess? The princess was never really there...only a result of the prince's ignorance about the reality of that portrait. Once he realized the true nature of the "princess of kashi", what do you think happened to all that angst and passion?

The term "illusion" is a poor translation of "mithya" in the Vedantic parlance. Mithya means "unreal", but it is only so when juxtaposed against the ever-existent Brahman. So when the Sage exhorts "Brahma satyam jagat mityha, jeeva brahmaiva napara", he means, "when juxtaposed against the changeless Brahman, the world of name-form-utility is ephemeral, and your true nature, o little being, is none other than that Brahman itself". An example given is that of the snake and rope. The rope appears to be a snake due to ignorance, but upon investigation, it turns out to be nothing apart from the rope. Similarly, the world, seems to be this thing that seems to exist separate from Consciousness, but upon investigation, turns out to be nothing apart from Brahman/Consciousness.

Saw this very interesting questionnaire for potential Vajrayana students (seemed apropos for all Advaita seekers) —

The mind is not Consciousness. It's very important to discern between mind and consciousness, though it might seem that they are the same. Mind is a phenomenon, it can start, stop, race, crawl etc etc. Consciousness is ever-present. One doesn't need a samadhi "experience" to realize this, though it might be necessary for many (I've had to go through that too). But the "freedom" is ever-present, right here and right now. What's missing the recognition, as it is mixed up with all the "things" it shines upon.

so you will continue to follow a path just because someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing told you something none of you understand? Good luck with that! 👍🏾 Usually dreams are just residual processing of the mind. What makes your dreams so special? That is clearly incorrect. Consciousness works precisely the way I said it does. You can believe what you want though. You clearly missed what I was pointing to. Yoga certainly does - “yogas chitta vritti nirodhah” (yoga is the cessation of the modifications of the mind). Neigong, ymmv depending on who you ask. Some stop at developing Siddhis. Others proceed to actually transform their mind.

so basically someone told you that your consciousness is in the two Nadis and that’s your “lower self”, while if it is in your central channel it is your “higher self”? so in addition to hearsay, you rely on dreams. So are these YOUR dreams or someone else’s? The “subtle” channels hold as much consciousness as a nail on my little toe. Which btw is the same as the consciousness that is held in any other part of the body. You see, consciousness doesn’t work in the way you think it does. It doesn’t flow in nadis or dantiens alone - it permeates everything, animate and inanimate. You’ll begin to understand if you can say who you are, in a fraction of a second, without a single thought. Their system integrates tantra as taught to them by the siddhas - tantra is a valid school of nondual practice, btw. Though I don’t think every school of Tibetan Buddhism actually does so. There is no “nondual” perception. There is nondual realization. Non-duality is not an experience. Anything you can experience is not reality. Techniques (yoga, neigong, etc etc) can help prepare one’s mind - in that they are invaluable. Nondual realization cannot be brought about by them.

wrong! ‘nondual Buddhist’ traditions come from the Buddha via mAdhyamaka of Nagarjuna. Buddha’s objections were not the with the Upanishads, but rather the Purva mimamsa and samhkya traditions. That is incorrect. Anyone can quote just about anything without context and then use that to reinforce circular arguments. You mean the Buddha didn’t know about the nondual nature of reality? I think all Buddhists would reject that claim. May be. I don’t know any, so can’t confirm or deny that. That is a misunderstanding of many beginners.

And you know this how? Of course it can. The result will not be what is typically expected though. Try it…go on.

There is no “high” or “low” when it comes to Self. Can you even pinpoint what your “lower self” is? What is it? Is it your body? The body replaces itself every seven years Is it your mind? The mind is a field of thoughts…they rise and fall. Momentary. Ever-changing. Is it your memories? What is so real about memories? They are of past phenomena that aren’t there anymore. Your emotions? They vacillate with the thoughts Feelings? They change with your emotions and sensory perception. Personality? how many personalities have you had since you were an infant ? There IS no lower self at all. It is all a conglomeration of layers acquired by habit (acquired and inherited). If you really investigate you’ll find it is empty and ephemeral, If you can say who you are, in a fraction of a second, without a single thought, then there is something to talk about.

Buddhism IS Indian, btw. There is no "Indian Buddhism" per se. All schools of Buddhism came from India itself. I think he would be silent on this subject, as he was about whether there was a Self or not. The Buddha was concerned with eliminating suffering, not with ontology or epistemology for the sake of it. All the churning that happens wrt Duality and Non-duality, is because there is not sufficient preparation in the individual mind. Nondual realization or even genuine interest in it can only happen in a sufficiently ripened mind. Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa's analogy of "a ladder and its rungs" is most apropos, though it might rankle many a modern seeker.

I am seeing points and counterpoints in favor of, and against, the proposed change in position vis-a-vis the OD members being allowed to return to this forum. I am undecided in terms of where I stand on the topic, because tbh I didn’t/don’t particularly care to take a stand politically - I see good and bad in both of sides of the binary divide. But I do believe that people who were abusive in the past (verbally, mainly, but also threatened physical violence in some cases) should be handled with caution. What is @Trunk‘s perspective on this subject?