dwai

I see. Would the term "transcendent" be more apropos? All-encompassing evokes the idea of "all creation is a part of me" kind of feeling, while "distant/speck of dust" evokes a separateness. The "speck of dust" idea can certainly generate a sense of awe/fear.

Interesting. Never would have considered all-encompassing. The Feminine seems to be more "all-encompassing" to me -- a mother's love for instance. What (if any) correlation is there between "distant", "aloof" and "all-encompassing"?

Yes, those too. But can those be categorized as "normal dreams", right?

In my experience, there are actually three categories of dreams (could be more, but these are what I've encountered). Normal dreams (ND) -- where one isn't really in control but is a dream character going through a dream universe Lucid dreams (LD) - where one IS the dream character, in control of one's actions and depending on the level of lucidity, the dream universe itself. It is still all "made up" (Pratibhasika Satya). Spiritual lucid dreams (SLD) - where one is the witness of the dream characters, universe and often interacting with deities or other beings. There is complete clarity that this is a dream, and the contents of the dreams are often spiritual teachings/transmissions being given. I found that SLDs are most vivid, and are similar in nature to Astral/Causal travels.

Very interesting. Why do you think that is the case?

How are you doing these days? I hope things have gotten better for you?

The two “poles” are aspects of one whole. Is that, in which polarity (seems to) arise(s), not beyond polarity? Anyway coming back to the Mother, Hinduism’s most iconic Mother, Kali is depicted as black (or more artistically, Blue). She is also called “Mahamaya” (the great illusory power). Consciousness (Shiva) and the power of veiling (Maya) are considered two sides of the same coin in some Hindu tantric traditions, and in fact in shaktism, the Mother is considered same as Brahman (which incidentally is neither a masculine nor a feminine term).

The Unmanifest is in "darkness" and the manifest is in "light". The unmanifest becomes manifest, and the manifest becomes unmanifest. Consider this --

Animals follow nature. They might not have the volition/free will like humans but they will seldom act out of character/their nature. Maybe if they are driven to madness from disease or trauma, they can act uncharacteristically, but that’s a rare occurrence, IME.

It really boils down to the level of "awareness" an individual has in the process/practice. For someone who is simply learning the physical movements/postures, talking about opening/closing is moot -- they will simply not understand what is being conveyed. Once the individual has learned the physical movements/postures, then inner details can be expounded/described. Is the individual aware of their fascial web? If so, do they have a semblance of control over that? If so, how well integrated is it within their body? Opening and closing come into play at that point, at a physiological level. Once this is understood, they can understand and produce the skill required to manifest the effects of said opening/closing. With that, their level of sensitivity will go up. They can now feel qi tangibly, they are aware of how energy moves in spirals. The process of spiraling is also a series of differentials of opening and closing but at a subtler level. There is opening and closing at the mental level too. The mind when attached to an idea/thought/concept/feeling is closed. When it is not attached to anything, it is open. It works at the dantien level too -- the dantien opens and closes in a cyclical manner. That series of interconnected, branching differentials works at many many levels, progressing that way out of emptiness (inner) into emptiness (outer). My first teacher wouldn't talk about this stuff in a general class setting, because the class would have students at different levels of skill/development. When I started attending private lessons with him, he shared more and more, as time progressed and my skill/understanding improved.

It can be considered differently at different levels/layers. At the physiological level, it can be viewed as a series of differentials. Like polarity in a battery. Say you are holding a posture like ward off in taijiquan, the joints/in your body will be set up as a chain/series of differentials, alternating as open/closed/open/closed. Michael Phillips had an excellent video on that from more than a decade ago. At higher levels, it means something else/more "internal".

No. The fact is that different chapters of the Gita provide different paths to Self-realization/preparation. Of course depending on who is interpreting the Gita, one path is emphasized over the others (in the commentary). For instance, Srila Prabhupada (ISKCON founder) interprets Bhakti as the most advanced, because he is of the Gaudiya Vaishnav school of Hinduism. There are levels of bhakti too. The bhakti of the unrealized is different from the bhakti of the realIzed. Bhakti based on jnana is more advanced than bhakti of blind faith kind.

For the advanced, the path is stillness of mind.

Not necessary and strongly advise against it. A former teacher of mine died from messing around with external alchemy (albeit in the Hindu tantric tradition). A post-mortem allegedly showed high levels of arsenic and mercury in his blood.

I practice Sudarshan Kriya Yoga which contains a sequence of pranayama.

I usually practice them 8-12 hrs apart. Mainly because I don’t have time in between. Usually I do pranayama and meditation in the morning these days, and zhan zhuang/taijiquan/neigong in the evening/night time. It depends of course on what kind of pranayama you do. If you’re doing lot of vigorous hatha yoga style pranayama, best to do it separately. If you are doing more subtle pranayama, I don’t see a reason why you can’t do ZZ after a couple of hours (if you have the time). Pranayama in the mornings helps balance and boost the energy levels, while acting as a mood stabilizer/developing equanimity. I find it very helpful as I enter my work day filled with lot of meetings and mental work. ZZ/taijiquan in the evenings helps sink the Qi that might have risen as a result of the work day, and brings the mind back to stillness and helps induce restful sleep.

shared by a wise sadhaka friend of mine, who is a direct disciple of His Eminence Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche TO CLARIFY THAT ŚŪNYATA IS NOT A COUCH-POTATO-STATE, THE ŚĀKYAMUNI TAUGHT BUDDHA-NATURE (TATHĀGATAGARBHA) "When we talk about emptiness, something beyond fabrication, we immediately think of a state of being that has no function, like a couch potato or piece of stone, but that is absolutely not correct. It is not merely a negation, elimination, or denial. It is not like the exhaustion of a fire or the evaporation of water. It is full of function, and we call this function buddha activity, which is one aspect of buddhanature. This buddhanature has an aspect of uninterrupted wisdom. This is the difficulty, because as soon as we talk about wisdom, we think in terms of cognition and the senses and their sense objects. We are curious about how a buddha perceives things. But although buddhanature is seemingly a cognizer, it has no object, and therefore it cannot be a subject. Furthermore, it’s not inanimate, nor is it animate, in the sense of mind. This is why the Uttaratantra Shastra is really complementary to the Mahasandhi (Dzogchen) teachings, which always say that mind and wisdom are separate—the dualistic mind of subject and object is separate from the nondual wisdom, which is not other than buddhanature. You could say that when Nagarjuna explains the Prajnaparamita, he concentrates more on its empty aspect, whereas when Maitreya explains the same thing he concentrates more on the “-ness” aspect. This “-ness” is buddhanature. You might wonder why the Buddha taught in the sutras that all phenomena are like clouds—unstable, naturally illusory, and empty. Why is it that even though we can experience them, they are without essence, like a dream or mirage? When Buddha says there is buddhanature, he isn’t saying that buddhanature truly exists. Rather, he is emphasizing the clarity aspect. Why is all this taught as emptiness in the Madhyamaka teachings and the Prajnaparamita Sutras? And as Mipham Rinpoche’s commentary on the Uttaratantra Shastra asks, why in this third turning of the wheel of dharma does the Buddha say that this buddhanature exists within all sentient beings? Isn’t that a contradiction? Furthermore, since buddhanature is very difficult to understand, even for sublime beings who are on the path, why is it taught here for ordinary beings? Let’s go to Maitreya’s text (Uttara Tantra Shastra) : He had taught in various places that every knowable thing is ever void, like a cloud, a dream, or an illusion. Then why did the Buddha declare the essence of buddhahood to be there in every sentient being? (Stanza 156) First of all, there is no contradiction between the second turning of the wheel of the dharma, where the Buddha taught that everything is emptiness, and the third turning of the wheel, where the Buddha taught that all sentient beings have buddhanature. In the Prajnaparamita Sutras of the second turning, the Buddha emphasizes that nothing is truly existent. So here, when Buddha says there is buddhanature, he isn’t saying that buddhanature truly exists. Rather, he is emphasizing its clarity aspect. When we talk about the union of clarity and emptiness, it’s important that we understand both aspects, not only the emptiness aspect. Beyond this, the Buddha’s teachings on buddhanature address, and counteract, five particular mistakes: There are five mistakes: faint-heartedness, contempt for those of lesser ability, to believe in the false, to speak about the true nature badly, and to cherish oneself above all else. So that those in whom these above were there might rid themselves of them, therefore was it declared. (Stanza 157) Generally, throughout the buddhadharma, and especially in the Mahayana, the most important thing is to generate enlightened mind. If you read the Bhadrakalpa Sutra (the Sutra of the Fortunate Aeon), you will hear how in the beginning one thousand buddhas generated enlightened mind. Generating enlightened mind is a promise or pledge to enlighten oneself and all sentient beings, and for practitioners on the path it is the most important thing. For example, when you pray, why does prayer work? It works because of this determination, this pledge to help sentient beings. It’s all based on that. Hence, there are five reasons to teach buddhanature, each one addressing one of the five mistakes, and these reasons are all about helping us make good on this pledge. First, if buddhanature were not emphasized, then a bodhisattva on the path might become discouraged, because the path is long, rough, and endless. One might also despise oneself, thinking, how can someone impure and useless like me achieve enlightenment? Bodhichitta, the wish to enlighten all sentient beings, will not arise within people who have that kind of discouragement and who despise themselves. When we know that buddhanature is there within us, like a gold coin buried in the dirt, it gives us a lot of encouragement. We know enlightenment is possible because buddhanature is there within us. This brings joy to the path. If we didn’t know there was a gold statue inside the mold, there would be no joy in breaking the mold. But when we know, the desire to find the statue inside is so strong that we don’t even notice the process of breaking the mold, which is generating enlightened mind. Second, as bodhisattvas we have to benefit all sentient beings. If we don’t know that buddhanature resides within everybody, then we might not respect other sentient beings. Rather, we might think we’re great because we’re bodhisattvas, and then despise other sentient beings. This could become a big obstacle, hindering us in benefiting other beings. Imagine that you think you’re a bodhisattva who has buddhanature and that other sentient beings don’t have buddhanature and therefore require your help. You think you have to somehow insert the buddha inside them. That’s a very big mistake. It’s what we call exaggeration or imputation. The Buddhist view is that everybody has buddhanature. It will not change. No one, no guru, no Buddha can insert it. All anyone can do is become some kind of path to enable people to realize it themselves. The third reason buddhanature is taught is to dispel the obstacles that obstruct us from having prajna. There are two such obstacles. The first one is imputation. Even though there is no buddhanature, we impute or imagine its existence by thinking that all these buddha qualities exist, such as the ushnisha, the protuberance on top of the Buddha’s head, symbolizing his great wisdom and enlightenment. But they don’t. We also need to overcome the second obstacle to wisdom: thinking that the buddha qualities do not exist, or that there are no buddha qualities within us, which is like some kind of criticism. This is the fourth reason buddhanature is taught. Finally, the fifth reason is to dispel the obstacle that prevents us from understanding that we are equal to others. If we don’t know that buddhanature exists equally within all beings, then we might have more attachment to ourselves and more aversion toward others. Those are the five reasons why buddhanature is taught. Emotions are temporary, so action is like a dream, and therefore the aggregates — the result of emotions and action — are like a mirage. Buddhanature is pure and free from all kinds of compounded phenomena, right from the beginning. The ultimate true nature is always devoid of anything compounded, so it is said that defilements, karma, and their full ripening are like a cloud, etc. (Stanza 158) Therefore, buddhanature is free from the three kinds of emotions: desire, aggression, and jealousy. It is free from the emotions of karmic formation, such as virtuous actions and non-virtuous actions. And it is free from the result of emotion, the five aggregates. Therefore, the emotions are like clouds. The defilements are said to be like clouds, karma is likened to the experience in dreams, and the full ripening of karma and defilements—the aggregates—are likened to conjurations. (Stanza 159) The nature of beings is primordially pure; that’s why we call it buddhanature. Although emotions are seemingly apparent and seemingly stubborn, seemingly like a second nature, they are never a second nature. They are like clouds—they are adventitious, and not a true part of you. This point is quite important. In Buddhism we always come to the conclusion that these emotions and defilements are temporary. When we’re looking at a gray cloudy sky, we might call it a cloudy sky, but it’s not really a cloudy sky. The clouds are never the sky. The clouds are temporary or adventitious. The next part is critical for our understanding of karma. Since emotions are temporary, so-called karma or action is like a dream. This is important because many people think that karma is almost like a substitute for God. They think it’s like someone who punishes you, rewards you, and decides your fate. But it’s never like that in Buddhism. Karma is actually like a dream. In a dream, you might experience all kinds of ecstasy, but no matter how much you pant and sweat, it’s just a dream. When we say, “It’s just a dream,” there’s sometimes a connotation that we despise it because it’s not real. But it doesn’t work like that either. If you become enamored with a dream elephant, then in the dream you go through the ecstasy of meeting the elephant, the sadness of missing the elephant, and eventually the agony of no longer having the elephant. That’s how karma works. This stanza is a big summary of Buddhism. Emotions are temporary, so action is like a dream, and therefore the aggregates—the result of emotions and action—are like a mirage. They are like a mirage; the closer you approach them, the more futile or essenceless they become. We try so hard to get close to the elephant, but even if there’s an engagement, the exchange of rings, a marriage ceremony, or whatever, the elephant remains a mirage. To emphasize this, the Buddha taught emptiness in the earlier turnings of the wheel of dharma. For example, in the Prajnaparamita Sutra, he said that form is emptiness, emptiness is form, and everything is like a mirage or a dream, and so forth. Then after that, in order to dispel the five kinds of obstacles or downfalls, the Buddha taught buddhanature in the third turning of the wheel of the dharma. There’s no reason to feel inferior; you have everything that that sublime being has. Now we come to the benefit of hearing about buddhanature. When we hear about buddhanature, we experience joy or enthusiasm toward the path because we know that enlightenment is possible. Even a dog, because it has buddhanature, is worthy of homage. No matter how many emotions you have erupting inside you, you’ll know that they are removable. That is wisdom. At the same time, you will know that all the qualities of the Buddha are within you—that is primordial wisdom." ~His Eminence Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, "The Clarity Aspect" Credits:https://www.lionsroar.com/the-clarity-aspect/

Some Zappa

Now can we have you start sharing some of your sublime wisdom again?

I've read something like that too, but I'm not sure how reliable that source is. Based on what I've heard, there are many modifications to the Kriya techniques taught by Lahiri Mahashaya. Paramahamsa Yogananda modified the techniques he got from Sri Yukteshwar Giri to suit western students who couldn't even sit properly on the floor. Other lineages have variations from the primary lineage, emphasizing different practices. I wish @Pilgrim would opt to come back to the TDB and share his vast knowledge of Kriya Yoga systems -- but I know he's reticent to engage in public fora for now...

CAVEAT EMPTOR -- This comparison is purely my own hypothesis, based on my own experiences and practice. Kriya Yoga is an interesting topic. There are many kinds of Yogic Kriya (literally, Action). Some are part of the Hatha Yoga tradition, such as the shatkriya - six kriyas, which are cleansing/purification techniques -- Kapalabhati pranayama - literally the "skull illuminating" pranayama - oxygenates the brain, cleanses the nasal passages Neti - the cleansing of the sinus cavity Nauli - creating a vacuum in the abdominal cavity by using muscular control Trataka - Gazing fixedly at a specific point (a ghee lamp flame for instance) Dhauti - washing the alimentary tract (controlled vomiting) Basti - yogic enema These are used as purification/preparatory practices undertaken by serious hatha yoga practitioners. But then we also have the more esoteric kriya yoga practices such as (famously) the Mahavatar Babaji's Kriya tradition, transmitted via Lahiri Mahashaya -> Sri Yukteshwar Giri -> Paramahamsa Yogananda lineage. There are other Kriya techniques -- Transcendental Meditation is one, Sudarshan Kriya Yoga is another, Tamil Siddhar Yoga traditions teach others. I've had the opportunity to learn and practice two such esoteric Kriya Traditions. I practiced Tamil Siddhar Tradition for a few years -- which was a blend of Hatha Yoga asanas, Pranayama, and mudras to raise kundalini in the central channel. The other is Sudarshan Kriya Yoga, as taught by Sri Sri Ravishankar and the Art of Living foundation. I learned and practiced it for a few years in the early 2000s, and then recently resumed its practice earlier this year. I've been regular in my practice since early February this year, and have missed 3-4 days (tops) due to travel schedules, etc. The pranayama methods outlined in Tamil Siddhar Yoga (TSY) and Sudarshan Kriya Yoga (SKY) have some similarities, though at one point I had thought the physically tougher TSY techniques were more "powerful" than SKY, simply because TSY is harder to practice. I couldn't have been more wrong. Having a long-standing and regular Dao Gong (Neigong)/Taijiquan practice now, I find there are some very interesting differences in what is cultivated in the SKY vs TSY vs Neigong systems. The Neigong system I practice is very powerful, and it works on the full range - body energy, subtle energy, and awareness/consciousness. Depending on the practice (and there is a wide range of practices, often using the same physical forms, but with different focus/emphasis), one or all of the above will be systematically exercised/cultivated. TSY is similar to Dao Gong, though I believe it doesn't work directly at the awareness level as much (or maybe because I only practiced it for 3-4 years, I didn't advance to the higher levels). SKY on the other hand works primarily in the subtle energy and awareness levels. The objective is to unify/consolidate the subtle energy, raise it to the third eye/crown point and enter into deep stillness/meditation. There is a body bliss similar to how Dao Gong produces it, and it continues throughout the day after each session. What is very interesting to me is the meditative quality it induces -- it results in progressively deepening stillness and clear luminescence of the mind, which too persists throughout the day, in spite of oftentimes very chaotic/stressful work schedules (I am often in meeting for 4-5 hrs a day, working on very complex and technical topics). Given my background in the other systems, I can't for certain say that if one practiced only SKY, or only TSY, or only Dao Gong, what the outcome would be. Speaking to friends who only practice SKY, I see that they too report similar experiences. I didn't have this kind of experience with TSY. Dao Gong is more "balanced" in my experience. I think the focus on the lower dantien has a lot to do with that. To my knowledge, they haven't interfered with each other as I've continued my practice(s) over a span of two decades. I have not practiced TSY in several years. But I can say with some confidence that SKY is the "easiest" of the three methods I've mentioned -- in that, the effort required to practice is progressively lower, and the entering into deep meditation is spontaneous and effortless -- even on days when the mind is relatively more distracted by worldly things. I do notice that SKY has "super-charged" the Daogong, especially the Jing/Qi level, and specifically the "Yang" aspect. The dao gong duration has progressively reduced for me, from 2-4 hrs a day for a long time, to no more than 45 minutes since the past 3-4 years. I do maintain a good 8-12 hr gap between SKY and Dao Gong/Taijiquan/Neigong practice -- mainly because my schedule prevents me from overlapping the two. I think also there is another reason to space these out -- they are working at different levels and doing them back to back seems like overloading the system to me. Why did I resume the SKY practice after many years of gap? I felt drawn to it. In retrospect, there is an element of "letting go" in SKY, while also maintaining balanced, even-keeled energy and mental state beyond the meditation time. SKY is good for someone looking to enter deep meditative states, undertake self-inquiry type meditation, with a focus on Self-realization.

It is not in the domain of experience (as we normally define it). It is a permanent shift in perspective, from identification as the body-mind-personality to consciousness/awareness/awakeness, etc. As far as your question is concerned - I am awake. I know people think it's good to be bashful about it, but there's no need for modesty, as it is not an "attainment". One doesn't develop superpowers other than a complete and total clarity about what's real and what is not. I've written about it quite a bit here, and an "explanation" of sorts here -- https://www.medhajournal.com/the-absurd-truth-hiding-in-plain-sight/ It is not that I WANT to destroy my individuality. Individuality is merely an appearance How do you "destroy" a mirage? You don't. You recognize it for what it is and stop chasing after it. Personality doesn't come from DNA. What comes from DNA is the physical attributes. Personality is purely a result of our karmic and mental conditoining. Yes, part of waking up is accepting the personality as it is, but not because that's who you are, but rather, because you know it is not who you are. Do you reject or accept a mirage? No, you simply acknowledge it as such and continue. No, we don't have to weed out all the traumas and negative inclinations - it is not possible to do that without realization. The solution to suffering is nondual realization and not the other way around. Proper meditation will allow one to develop witness consciousness. Once witness consciousness develops, and the process of inquiry deepens, the traumas and negative inclinations will thin on their own. The more the mind becomes "clear", the lower the effects of these patterns of contiditoning. Our traumas and negative inclinations don't imprison us, we imprison our Self by refusing to let go of the "good" and the "bad". Once we spend enough time watching the stream of experiences you mention (including actions, thoughts, emotions and feelings), we realize "I am not the body, mind, personality, experiences", etc. After that, we realize that body, mind, personality, experiences (i.e. the world) appear within us, and there is nothing apart from "us" (aka consciousness). This realization is the full nondual realization. P.S. There's not a thing I've shared on this forum that isn't in the domain of my own direct experience/realization.

So you mean out of the force of habit/practice? What does “actualizing the original spirit” even mean? You must be under the impression that you are not already your original spirit. If that is the case, you are not really “you”, but are in the process of becoming you. So you are not being, but doing and becoming. That can only happen when there is no realization. Because realizing your true nature means, recognizing/understanding who you already are, and have always been, and will forever continue to be. There is no improvement/actualization or addition after that point, no transforming into original spirit, no birthing of an immortal fetus or whatever else. It is simply a direct cognition of your true nature as the Dao itself. What more can you do to become it? Just stop doing things out of habit, all the trying to become. Yes it could be said that this “stop doing” is a process too. But is very a different kind of process — that’s why it’s called “not doing”. Realization is not entering a stream, it is knowing that one is water itself. Streams and oceans are used as allegorical/metaphorical teaching tools, not to be taken literally. That simply is incorrect. There is no beyond realization, if you truly know what realization is.

What else is the motivation for wanting to go “beyond the beyond”? Yes indeed. It is. The desire for worldly things is replaced with a desire for realization — to be free from suffering caused by the desire for worldly things. But after realization, it is discarded, like how one might use a thorn to remove another thorn stuck in one’s thumb, and then discard both. After the removal of the second thorn, why is there a need to hold on to the first one?

that’s a misunderstanding of what the Buddha said, but it’s a longer, more protracted discussion I’ve had many times before with a few folks here. I won’t go down that rabbit hole for now. Yes that’s a good question — what is the difference?!? Who is communicating and with whom? When in ignorance, the Self takes on the form of these masters and points out the Self, to the Self. It can be in form of a deity or departed master, but is Ask yourself, in any of the stories you’ve read or heard, have you ever known these masters to manifest themselves physically in front of a “seeker”? I’ve had encounters with a few such masters and deities, but never in a situation where I can physically touch them. It is usually in the astral or causal planes that this happens - in the subtle body. What does that mean? Astral and causal planes are appearances within consciousness, and everything we can experience in these are also essentially within consciousness alone. So why then would someone experience these “individuals”? It is the mind that experiences them, much as the mind does all other phenomena. But unlike the mind that is engrossed in sensory perceptions being covered by rajas and tamas, the mind veiling becomes more transparent as satva becomes the primary “substance” that covers it. So the satvic mind experiences these beings as being apparently separate, with maybe a specific purpose of addressing a specific aspect of knowledge, or as a trigger point for a big realization. Now that can lead down the path of understanding what the mind is. Though many don’t spend enough time trying to understand this very important aspect which makes knowledge possible. It is the mind alone that is in ignorance, and the mind alone where knowledge can arise to dispel this ignorance. Consciousness/Self is not that, and ever untouched/spotless.