Apech

Samkhya philosophy which is the ancestor of all dharmic metaphysics does posit both a real universal substance (objectively real) and real observing selves (purusha). I don't think they were being 'gratuitous' in doing so - in fact their system and terminology/taxonomy are fundamental to vedanta, yoga, Buddhism, Jainism etc. etc.

Because it’s always your fault - get used to it

One of my chickens was killed by a weasel last night so please show some sensitivity to her toothlessness.

I'm triple vaxxed and caught covid from another vaxxed person and we regularly wear masks. There is no harm in sensible precautions of course - but this is something we are going to have to live with - some people are more high risk from serious illness of course but I fit the bill for that also but for me Covid was unpleasant but only lasted about a week.

Yes I've fact checked this - it's true.

Look out for quantum baby sheep in Scotland:

I always find 'ego' discussions to be a little confused. Most (and probably all) spiritual systems will tell you to clean your act up before you start - deal with your self and relationships - and most of the cleaning up is about reducing self-clinging. Essentially - be a better person by being kinder, nicer, less attached to your own needs and wants. But being 'sorted' in this way doesn't mean you are less of an ego - actually you might be stronger egoically in some senses. I've noticed for instance a huge difference between westerners who take up Buddhism and Tibetans. Tibetans get stronger, more open, happier and full of personality. While westerners seem to try to diminish, become pale and apologetic. Neither in my view has removed ego but rather have either used it for themselves or against themselves. I think this essentially resolves down to a conceptual problem. The other layer to this is the non-dual subject/object distinction which is you could say another story. We could say that our nature in terms of the dualistic world is double. That we have a manifest being, a body and mind, which is specific and 'physical' - and we also have a pure self, a soul if you like which is intangible (ordinarily). The problem lies in that contained between these two is a host of energetic entanglements, emotional baggage, cloudy obstructions and the like - even what one might call parasitic entities which exhibit in things like addictive thoughts and activity. It is very hard to see clearly through this, we might say we have spiritual cataracts which make it hard to see what is what. What we do about this, how we approach it, is the issue. Do we just say that all this material is illusory and to let it go? Or do we deal with it in some way by looking at it's nature, seeing what it is, transforming it or clearing it out? Even if we answer this question in the positive it is still not particularly easy to see what to do. For instance sometimes struggling with a problem, like a fish caught in a net, makes it worse. Sometimes leaving a problem be just lets it fester and grow. The implication then, is that we have to grow all our talents, vary our approach as each obstacle arises and learn how to negotiate different situations in different ways.

"Defilements are great wisdom, supportive for the yogis like a forest for fire." - Maitripa "Connate mind-itself is the dharmakaya as such. Connate appearances are the dharmakaya's light. Connate concepts are the dharmakaya's waves. Connate inseparability is the dharmakaya's actuality." - Gampopa "Concepts, which arise as if they were something concrete, take them firmly to be the dharmakaya. That is meditation; only then one understands. When this becomes an experience, the nature of mind is seen." - Gampopa

You do not recommend it???

Likewise, all the Hearers Think that they achieved nirvana, But they have not achieved the final nirvana Revealed by the Buddha. They are only resting. - White Lotus of Sublime Dharma Sutra.

Tummo or candali is one of the six yogas of Naropa and is basically kundalini.

In terms of the subtle body I agree with this. The side channels in my way of seeing it become two ways of looking, one is object related and the other 'imaginative'. We can negotiate the subtle body by switching from one to the other. This before we learn to rest in the central channel. You could say it's a mix of practical skills and dreaming - which ultimately lead to realisation. It's all about negotiating the subtle space (which the Egyptians called the Duat) and the abilities learned accelerate our assimilation (of emotional energy for example) and increase our ability to respond. The image for this is exploring a strange landscape - this is the shamanistic side of working. yes but in a very special sense the unconditioned conditions itself for the purpose of learning - it has agency - it being Self - your own Self is your guru which is leading you on through the process. I think this is a very important point especially for rhinos (!). But then half the time I am just a monkey. Duality is posited for working. The world is dual - double - which is why it is full of doubt and uncertainty. But it is the ground for spiritual work. This is how I see it. qi is a deep subject. In some ways I suppose you could say qi is spirit in action - or something like that. In some senses everything is a form of qi anyway so it includes all that we are talking about. Thank you for answering.

To say something is fundamental literally means it is at the bottom, i.e. the basis for everything else. Or another way of looking at it is that everything other than the fundamental nature can be reduced to the fundamental nature. So for instance, I would say, if asked, 'what is an emotion, fundamentally?' - that it is a motion of mind, a flow of mind. So if you watch trees bending and swaying in a storm, yes the trees are moving but you might say it's the wind that moves. The wind being like the mind. It doesn't discount the waving trees but is a kind of deeper explanation than say 'the trees are swaying'. I could say, for comparison, that if I feel fear ... it is actually mind that is 'fearing' where 'fearing' is a state of flow or change or disturbance. Or that being happy is another kind of flow of and in mind. Provided it is clear that by mind I don't mean just the thinking head but rather the field of awareness in which we live and have our being. In fact I could call it spirit instead to make this clear I suppose. I believe that this spirit is fundamental because I don't think there is anything beneath or behind it. It is the absolute basis for everything and is not caused by anything thing else. The mistake made by many people, including a lot of people on this thread, is to separate out this spirit (or Mind) as being something other than say, your emotions and so on. The main way this is done is to denegrate ideas, feelings, emotions and physical states by calling them 'empty' and using this 'empty' as a special category. e.g. fear is empty, love is empty, pain is empty. While in truth the 'empty' = shunyata is actually the quality of the spirit/mind itself. Being empty in this sense means being free of conditioning ... so to say spirit is empty means spirit is free and unbound essentially and in itself. The consequence of this is that all phenomena which result from the presence of spirit, like the waving tree branches, are empty also - but not nothing, but spirit in presence. This of course means that fundamentally not only is spirit free and unbound but so are you because (and this is the non-dual part) you and spirit are 'not-two' i.e. non-dual. While your self might be a jumbled collection of thoughts, feeling, memories and so on, your Self is spirit itself. It is this Self/spirit which is the basis for your life and the purpose of your life is to work through the various subtle levels of being towards a unified state which is both self-realised and , like spirit itself imperishable, an immortal body as predicted by Neidan, Jesus and perhaps in a more hidden way others also. If this be error and upon me proved I never wrote nor no man ever loved.

I've come to the conclusion that in recent times we have been spun a myth of freedom. I mean this in all senses, spiritual, personal, social and so on – that the optimum state is to do what you want, be who you want, say what you want – and that this constitutes freedom or liberty. To free something or somebody means to remove restrictions and allow them to move as they will. So to that extent to call yourself free (and not a slave) does mean an unrestricted state. But for someone who actually goes through this process they will quickly realise that in the real world it is not that simple. Even released from bondage you still need to live in the world. So what does freedom look like then? Spiritually you might think of a totally free state where one transcends completely the limitations of the world, where your spirit is released from limitation to move freely where it wills. This sounds a lot like death. A spirit released from the body to roam free – but in being free has no interaction with any other being or thing. That does not seem like a particularly attractive or worthy goal. If we think about the 'dom' part of the word freedom – it actually means a regulated state, a dominion for instance. A kind of dome or space in which freeness is exercised. Seen in this way the idea of freedom takes on a slightly different meaning. Gone is the idea of total release from all restraint and the new meaning is the ability to move at will in one's own sphere - in one's own world. That dome is a limitation in absolute terms – as there is that which is the beyond the sphere also – but it does not carry the same imprisoning sense as a form of bondage. So thinking in terms of my physical environment, my social relationships, the country I live in and so on – what would it take to make myself free? And the answer I propose, far from the ability to move about without any limitation, is order. If you establish order in your affairs it allows you to operate without interference or struggle. For instance if you set your finances in order then you are not continually worrying about paying bills or desperate to find food. If you establish order in your personal relationships then you avoid drama and distraction. Order is freedom and freedom is order.

what if one remains in the present moment but it turns out to be completely shit, wouldn’t you move to the next present moment.

...what is!

Yes but WHY? did the bee alight from a dandelion?

My understanding is a bit of a mixture of Buddhist and non-Buddhist ideas. I think one of the huge issues with 'spiritual' work generally is avoidance ... working with emotional debris and 'mud' etc. is difficult and slow and often doesn't seem to produce any results except more misery. I think mud is a good analogy since it is a mixture of earth (physical) and water (emotional) and can lay dormant until stirred up and so on. Stagnation is a big issue - as is ossification. An emotional stagnation leads to fixed views of life - so there is a mental factor here too. On the basis of the truism that everything is connected - then traumatic memories lock in a kind of emotional stasis which contain a myriad of thoughts, feelings, memories, images and so on which remain clumped and seemingly unresolvable. In fact some issues are unresolvable and have just to be let go. But generally there is a process for calming, pinning down, un-locking trapped energy and so on which frees up the suppressed emotional energy and allows it to become available for living more fully. I think both are true.

Glad to hear you got rid of it quickly - and found an anti-viral that works!

took about a week but as you say it was a quick cycle

Thanks Ralis - looks like I've managed to get away with a mild flu like condition with strange body aches (at one point it felt like I'd swallowed a house brick - very strange) - but it has left me very tired and it's hard to concentrate. But still enjoying this conversation!

I'm reading this thread through COVID brain fog - so forgive me if I miss the point or repeat. Ultimately, whatever it is that we are ... or the reality which is ... is complete. That is, it is a continuum and has no gaps, contradictions or error. But in effect the transformations we are involved in inevitably involve struggle. Struggle with fear for instance, or with stupidity and so on. The non-duality of it all is that it can be both at once. ... lost my thread ... please carry on ...

it is empty of other

Anyone making such an observation is exercising agency. Does it have to belong to anyone? The continuum of Buddha nature.

No observable agency to who? My personal experience tells me that volition and awareness are indistinguishable.