3bob

every great saint has faced down a great demon, (including their own) ... children we can not long remain

Another aspect or variation related to us as beggars and helpers but of a rather different context which I believe can also be correlated to the subject is the saying, "cast your bread upon the waters" or "Send your substance [out] over the face of the water that you may find it again many days hence. Give a share to seven, or even to eight, for you cannot know what disaster may come upon the land." Of which I found the following interpretation, "...The message to be gained from these verses is really not so much "here's how to invest and make money", but rather "don't set your heart on riches, for everything in this world is uncertain". Most of us do not have any "excess capital" laying around, let alone enough to make it worthwhile to ship it off to seven or eight different places. This was certainly true of most of Solomon's original audience as well. In the history of the family of God, the privileged have been few (Matt.10:25; cf. 1Cor.1:26). No, these verses are first and foremost meant to produce a sense of humility in the face of life's uncertainty. We who live from day to day (or more or less so) put our trust in the Lord. But those who have an excess of worldly means are subtly reminded here by Solomon that worldly wealth is in fact a very uncertain thing, even if the ephemeral nature of worldly riches is often blindly ignored by most of those who possess them for a time..."

butterfly's were once weird looking bugs and the beautiful lotus flowers have roots in the mucky old mud

"So at best" (?) I do not agree with your ending summation... but thanks for all the information to consider.

if a lot of preconceived conditions and or judgment's started getting attached to the situation they could override or wipe out the compassion and joy of any spontaneous giving from the heart, - also if you will such a spontaneous act might described as an aspect of wu-wei working in the world... granted there are established norms of householders supporting monasteries' which has its place and is or can be more or less like a pre-planned and accepted "deal"; on the other hand a situation may arise that puts one outside of what can devolve into a solely materialistic and or mechanical like pre-planned conditional action/reaction.

MH, In a way such would not really be a "spiritual aspect" if both parties expected something either way... it would then be more like business and or of terms related to a deal.

hope, faith, love, wisdom,

.

Well I'd say it sounds like there are some conceptual if's, and's or but's in play or pending in comparisons of what you said in posts #25 and #29, some of which you have more or less addressed in your reflections on, "halfway down in post 25". Further, and for instance about some possible "if's, and's or but's" from my take: 1. Brahman never really leaves or goes anywhere. (with such only being apparent) 2. Also a body does not manifest without Brahman, thus I'd say a two way street connotation may give a better idea. 3. Good karma brings us to a good karmic state, but not enough to realize Brahman realizing Brahman. 4. Brahman is not exactly another experience (among countless others) of a someone experiencing it, or even of the fine feeling of two being as one. 5. In regards to the excerpt below from your earlier post: A. Brahman is the truest definition of us. B. In the awareness of (A.) we are eternal. C. The past and future really only exist now, for only an identification in time and space make such appear as so. D. Brahman identity is specifically universal, eternal and constant regardless of formations of various atoms. "Since there is no specific constant material THING that defines one of us, our awareness and Identity is a circumstance of atoms that happen to be in a localized area , we are impermanent .... merely a continuation of past through to future of a pattern -called a body. Our awareness is simply a principle brought into being by the proximity of certain groupings of atoms. Thats IT ! simple fact" By Stosh Om

Well Stosh thanks for sharing your flexible openness in #27. There is an old translation from part of the Chandogya Upanishad that I've posted before and will post again below, I feel it points to the crux of the matter of us not being dependent on just an arrangement of atoms (either by ego manipulation or by chance) that come and go.... Chandogya Upanishad, 8th PRAPÂTHAKA 1st KHANDA: "1. Harih, Om. There is this city of Brahman (the body), and in it the palace, the small lotus (of the heart), and in it that small ether. Now what exists within that small ether, that is to be sought for, that is to be understood. 2. And if they should say to him: 'Now with regard to that city of Brahman, and the palace in it, i. e. the small lotus of the heart, and the small ether within the heart, what is there within it that deserves to be sought for, or that is to be understood?' 3. Then he should say: 'As large as this ether (all space) is, so large is that ether within the heart. Both heaven and earth are contained within it, both fire and air, both sun and moon, both lightning and stars; and whatever there is of him (the Self) here in the world, and whatever is not (i. e. whatever has been or will be), all that is contained within it.' 4. And if they should say to him: 'If everything that exists is contained in that city of Brahman, all beings and all desires (whatever can be imagined or desired), then what is left of it, when old age reaches it and scatters it, or when it falls to pieces?' 5. Then he should say: 'By the old age of the body, that (the ether, or Brahman within it) does not age; by the death of the body, that (the ether, or Brahman within it) is not killed. That (the Brahman) is the true Brahma-city (not the body 1). In it all desires are contained. It is the Self, free from sin, free from old age, from death and grief, from hunger and thirst, which desires nothing but what it ought to desire, and imagines nothing but what it ought to imagine. Now as here on earth people follow as they are commanded, and depend on the object which they are attached to, be it a country or a piece of land, 6. 'And as here on earth, whatever has been acquired by exertion, perishes, so perishes whatever is acquired for the next world by sacrifices and other good actions performed on earth. Those who depart from hence without having discovered the Self and those true desires, for them there is no freedom in all the worlds. But those who depart from hence, after having discovered the Self and those true desires, for them there is freedom in all the worlds.

Stosh, If you are interested that is not it per the Upanishads.

ah, that sounds like a fancier way of ego not being able to see itself out of the picture... btw, its not ego killing ego which is just more ego as you imply, its more like the truth seeing through that which may or may not be an intelligent, sophisticated, rational and reasonable human identity - but which is still a relative and woven composite of form thus not the Self or Brahman core which ego will never and can never know - for only Brahman knows Brahman... and along with that idea one or more true guru's have said, "know the Self by the Self".

"...Even with spiritual attainment, the Ego grows commensurate to the spiritual progress. The opposite of the "I am nothing to become everything" paradigm..." by Dwai I'll have to disagree with your drift above Dwai, although such could be true of a being that grows powers or siddhis commensurate with ego without having gone through stages of ego death leading to Self-realization, for in such a case they then become an ego on steroids! Further, I'd bet that most true gurus only keep a small but workable amount of identity around for the sake of functioning in the world - since they have overwhelmingly become identified with (or gone past the point of no return of being caught in ego identification) while still living in and interacting with the world but mainly doing so from the core of being and spiritual essence.

it's kind of interesting that ego can not really imagine existence without it being in the picture...thus defining one of its limits.

most all words are mere (and or conceptual) teachings excepting when they are also empowered by more than just conceptual thinking or logical reasoning... thus a teacher living in and speaking from such empowerment would not fit into your apparent and general dismissal.

hey MH did you get on one of those water-jet devices? not only can you walk on water with those but also jump on it...hehe

I'd say that "Neti, Neti" is not defined as a polar opposite; also 99.99% of our "real life experiences" are relative - being that 99.99% of us are relatively identified with this or that which is not what Neti, Neti is pointing to.

Nikolai1, I can dig a lot of what you said above and your insights but I would disagree with your apparent summation that, "there is no clear cut distinction between ego and true self"... being that ego has a birth and a death whereas for the true Self: "Neti, Neti"

I like that unlearner although it sounds to me like you are mixing up concepts to much in using terms like "anatman" and "essentially the same entity"...

Zerostao, Wow a fantastic video !!! Thanks

.

#78

S.W., I think the quote can easily be seen to imply meanings about Buddha's since such teachings - per the words "greater" and "foundational vehicle" found in said quote are given by them, (including the wonderful sayings from Zen where the teachers also prepare or maintain an "opportunity" or "gap" to foster their students sudden realization), there are also the words of, "fundamental presence" which per context can also point to the compassionate and thus freeing action of a Buddha's presence or influence -which obviously does not point to just "anything" happening in such a dharmic presence. Btw. S.W. I don't know what kind of Buddhist you fancy yourself to be but you sound more "blatant" than most.

if a quote has gapping holes in it there is nothing bizarre about pointing them out per most rational standards... where as glossing over things without any critical thinking (which btw is not something suggested in most wisdom teachings) tends to be much more problematic.