dwai

The categorization was more for those who don't see any spirituality at all...just wanton materialism/consumerism/sensuality. If wealth and power are acquired via dharmic means, then certainly there is no disqualification. Our actions (and underlying motivations) qualify/disqualify us more than the fruits of those actions.

It is easy to forget because we think of it as a fleeting thing, something to be clung to. But it not only is not fleeting, but rather ever-present. It doesn’t need to be practiced either. But it takes time to understand...

The one who noticed the mental peace and then shattering of the mental peace, was it bothered or affected in any way?

Of course. Nor do I ask that of you. You are entitled to your views and I am to mine I only responded because you seemed to be interested in engaging with me over this subject. My apologies if I misunderstood your quoting me multiple times

I got that...though I’m not convinced that it is applicable.

I was inquiring about your point about content and context

so?

I see both black and white as content. Context is only evident when they come together

Isn't it? Don't see any context first. Only see the content.

All of this is illuminated by the light of nondual awareness. But it comes after one understands and explores the mechanism of the "mind" imho. Can you give an example to elaborate?

There is clearly an opportunity to improve the vocabulary...import words and concepts which are missing Why not? "Mind" comprises of four components -- field of thoughts a storehouse of memories and impressions intellect identity affixer Context comes after we can understand content. For example, you've been given a big sealed bag and told to do something with it. You open the bag and see some white powders, some small crystalline granules, a big blob of yellow slick substance, two white oval objects which seem to have something squishy inside, and a rectangular pan.

I’d say that even the “self” that attaches to the thoughts is essentially empty and dependently co-arising. But the clear light of awareness neither dependently co-arises nor is it swabhava-shunya. Nicely put. But it’s not possible to understand how the mind functions and how thoughts work without having a clear vocabulary and classification of the “mind”. BTW that is not just the Buddhist path, but rather is the path of jnana yoga in all Indic traditions.

Look up Marilyn Cooper — http://www.littleriverkf.com/teachers/master-marilyn-cooper/ Another great teacher is Master Byron Zhang. He teaches in Fremont. When I had asked him whether he’s taking students, he’d said he was (This was back in 2018, and I was inquiring for my sister who lives near him). https://basks.com/resources/master-byron-zhang/

That’s a valid point , but isn’t duality an everyday experience? How does this self-awareness work? Is it like the case of “how does one know if one has eyes?” question? Do thoughts have a role to play there?

Self-aware quality implies a subject, does it not? But objects also rise and dissipate in itself.

Spent Wednesday at Devil’s lake in Wisconsin with my Sifu and some brothers. We hiked up to the top of the west bluff trail and meditated in what my Sifu calls his Rock Temple, overlooking the lake. Was a very powerful experience. Do you have special places like that where you have meditated and felt extraordinary power?

I find this interesting and worthy of exploration. If a subject doesn’t experience objects, who does?

I wasn’t particularly referring to the nuances within the Indic traditions themselves. Yes they build upon, cross-pollinate and enhance each other (as they have done so for millennia). Also, in my humble opinion, it is not possible to detach the philosophical traditions of India from its culture and language. So all the sophistry that exists, does so due to these various traditions (samkhya, vedanta, yoga, Buddhism, Jainism etc). I think the gap in the west is basically a result of the incumbent philosophical traditions that have shaped its worldview. And by that I mean the abrahamic ones (although they have appropriated and digested from the Ancient Greeks, romans and other “pagan” traditions). English language doesn’t have the context or syntax to clearly convey ideas about consciousness because the underlying philosophy is and has been so confused about it. Am I being too harsh in such a pronouncement? Maybe, but it’s just my studied observation. Take it with a grain of salt that’s because they too had intrinsic richness of philosophical traditions. Actually most of what shaped the western understanding of Indian (and eastern) traditions came via the European philologists with an abrahamic agenda. After the abrahamic systems lost their steam in public imagination overtly, much eastern philosophy got appropriated and sold as original “enlightenment” and “post-enlightenment” western thought.

That which has a beginning also has an end. I just heard the news that a very dear old friend of my family passed on today. She was in her 80s, a very spiritual person who dedicated her life to her order since the 1980s. She was full of wisdom and would always give sage advice to all those who came to her -- and they would flock to her simple drawing room every day...all the time. From being an active member of a community, she had to retire to not being able to go outdoors as she aged further, and then during these difficult times, broke her shoulder after a fall and was bed-ridden for a few weeks until her eventual demise. I think of her life, and find that she didn't have an easy one. Very talented, very wise, she was my teacher (and many others) -- a brilliant artist and art teacher. Her family life was troubled as her only daughter had difficulty getting settled in her life -- she sought solace in spiritual practices. Her husband, a brilliant scientist and wonderful, kind soul passed away more than 2 decades ago. And she continued on, handling the ups and downs of life with great equanimity. I've never seen her flustered, angry, sad, or depressed ever -- I used to go to her home whenever time permitted, (and in the last 2 decades whenever I'd visit my home town in India) -- she was always full of joy, love, and equanimity. What a wonderful example to set for all who were in her field of influence! And yet, this person passed away in almost complete isolation, stuck indoors under Covid-19 quarantine rules. I am quite sure that she let go with as much ease as she lived her life.

being thoughtless is very easy. Just put all your attention to the next thought that will rise in your mind The problem is with the wishy-washy English language when it comes to the mind and it’s contents (aka thoughts). I’ve not found a better system to categorize and understand the cognitive process than that provided via the Indian traditions — antahkarana — the inner faculties, the four components which make up the “mind”. The problem isn’t really with “thoughts” (which are called vrittis or modifications in the mind-field), but rather with the misidentification with them. So it is perfectly okay to not try and stop the mind, so long as the understanding occurs that “I” am not the mind.

Wilber appropriated a lot of techniques and ideas from Vedanta and applied in a haphazard manner, I dare say without proper understanding.

One big change I notice is the cessation of “personal” ambition. That can be quite difficult to navigate as a householder. In Advaita Vedanta there are two types of renunciation — the renunciation of the seeker the renunciation of the awakened When one doesn’t give up samsaric connections in their quest, thereby remaining a householder (or at least an active member of the transactional world), there will arise a deep sense of renunciation after awakening. That can be hard to reconcile against the demands of the transactional world for a while.

A very key piece of information that’s missing for most people is that “thoughts” don’t belong to anyone. Thoughts rise and sink back into the collective subconscious (universal mind). What is different from person to person is the proclivity to certain types of thoughts based on conditioning (this life and past lives). The “demons” are not the thoughts themselves but the patterns of (karmic) conditioning that attract those thoughts. Rejecting them makes them stronger, ignoring them doesn’t eliminate them. They arise for a reason, but people are unaware of why. They are an opportunity to “cleanse” the conditioning, to let go. For letting go, first step is acceptance followed by understanding.

It is normal to experience one’s own demons during meditation, especially in the early-intermediate stages. That is why a good teacher and a supportive practice group (sangha) can be helpful.