Songtsan

Trueness

inner and outer are illusions - there is only awareness and its objects. Just see everything as external, including yourself...maybe? Or you can see it like a set of nested Russian dolls....external contains the internal, which contains a smaller version of the external, which contains a smaller version of the internal, dwindling inwards towards everything and nothing whatsoever

yvan eht nioj. then play your life in reverse And unjoin the war

I will have to study this....

Inter-being! co-dependently originating! interdependently arising! mutually co-existent! Yin/Yang! Non-dual!

the internal and the external inter-are

no because it partially is under our control...just a small amount...like butterfly wings in a hurricane. We are after all, a part of it.

You are the equal to that which you seek Buddha nature True Dharma Eye Seeker is the same as the sought The reality you see is you So remember: "This is made of me!" As you discover the discoverer And forget the difference Between that and you

Fucking excellent post as usual. You help motivate me big time! I may respond some later on this if it seems educational somehow or other for me to pry further, but I believe what you are saying. so get into ground state and send consciousness back on itself, correct? Negatively attenuate all other perceptions too, right?

Great points and great post. I concur. Light is part of the electromagnetic spectrum, as well as infrared - which would apply in the sensation-perception of heat. Our sensory-perceptive faculties make visible to us certain aspects of that part of existence, yet not other forces which still affect us - hence invisible forces. What struck me as interesting was that evolution of life has by natural means made it so that senses would develop in more and more complexity as the ages past, Senses that could explore deeper and deeper facets of reality for consciousness. I can imagine one day that life might evolve further senses of some sort, uncovering whole new areas of exploration - not necessarily in the realm of normal reality either. If evolution selects that those individuals with the expanded senses did better in the long run, then there would be a general (fuzzy logic style) trend - linear or curvilinear relationship between depth of reality uncovered and individuals likelihood of passing on its genetics. So in the long run, as our species evolves, I would expect that they would become more and more aware, in a totality of ways, of the fabric of existence. I really like this thought I am covered - I usually reach out to the shakti or the djinn or whatever strange and interesting/personality which watches through my perceptive facilities is. This mostly in times of apathy, hopelessness, abject states of various description, or other such things. And yes I would also reach a hand out to my peeps as well - of which I consider TTB folks also.

good find - I used to have that book, though I failed to read the entire thing. In Thai massage everything revolves around the same area - massage is supposed to end there (begin with feet).

good point - I am thinking that the correlation between normal center of gravity and LDT area is no mere coincidence however - but I have no further conjecture to add on this.

I am in agreement fully.

Yeah - I have learned to be very skeptical of teachers and supposed enlightened individuals, new or old, including Buddha, Dalai Lama, Swami Muktananda, Jesus, Mohammed, Deci Belle , Kundalini, God, and etc. etc themselves. I examine people from all angles, all the time, and will not stop for as long as I know them. Teachings speak for themselves. They are not necessarily reflective of the teacher, as ideas are like constantly evolving viruses - no one can be said to have started the chains of their passing. Also, people have a natural tendency to present the best of themselves. When someone openly presents the worst of themselves is when I trust them more. Fortunately, no matter how enlightened an individual says they are, arrogance, pride, elitism, one-sidedness, lack of compassion, etc. will sink through their words and keep things in check. I have not met or heard of anyone who doesn't have some type of agenda behind their actions, if nothing else than stating their own beliefs as absolute or best, as if they have personally seen all lives and all possibilities. Thus I kill all Buddhas. I still love them all though.

I have the book excerpts section up - needs some work still - trying to find author's names and such for reference....

I'll look into - I have a translation by Ralph Alan Dale, not sure how good he is.... I don't know how much things are meant literally, conventionally, metaphorically, etc. in these teachings...sometimes it's best to consider them from all angles.. I just can't imagine a state of being that would be 100% the same without even a sheen or hint of something moving within it, through it, on it, or without it. I am, however, open to the possibility. Experiencing directly is obviously paramount. Trust no one but your self in these things. Seek to go where the leaders have gone, seek not to follow in their path.

I have found a neat solution to my need to make posts on this site...this has the potential to be very useful actually. I have the aforementioned 1000 pages of quotes from all the books I read in prison...I intended to type them up and store them as "my bible" - something to read when I needed to read something..I am going to add them to the quotes thread. Therefore I will be learning from the masters as I type, as well as focusing excess yang energy...I think it's pretty nifty. EDIT: Actually, since they are excerpts and not quotes, I will add them to my personal practice journal...

I like it - to me it suggested that the drive to transcend, refine, see beyond, etc. is its own food. The thought that one might peel back a mystery, touch divinity, and so forth gives one the expectation that one is on the edge of something, riding the wave of possibility. It gives one that sense of childhood exploration - especially for those who have grown soul weary of the ten thousand things. Children don't have that yet. In Taoism, they say to become a child of illusion. Being on a path such as this is an exciting adventure, even if nothing is gained.

Here is a symbolic representation of how a thing, idea, etc. can approach a zenith, but never quite touch on absolute...forgive the poor quality - I drew this in Windows Paint. The actual curve would be more lie a quarter circle, and the lines would forever draw closer to the X/Y axes, yet never touch. The 0% and 100% are untouchable. The extremes are just forever receding zeniths, representing infinite nature - no beginning, no end...I have often found this concept useful in my idea that there are no absolutes. Even if there are absolutes, this concept applies to almost anything.

I'd be down for that myself, but it is so hard to find in the states....

has it ever been reached? http://planetsave.com/2013/01/06/temperature-below-absolute-zero-achieved/

I also have a large influence from Vedanta (and the Tantras)...mainly Advaita Vedanta, Shankara-style. My only initiation into an actual lineage was Kriya Yoga (Hariharananda), although I have been a member of a couple of Zendos (never took formal vows because I am not ready to do that yet). I practiced Kriya Yoga, Raja Yoga, Jnana Yoga and Kundalini yoga (not 3HO - I mean the systems such as Siddha, Kripalu, etc, which rely heavily on spontaneous yoga via shakti as Goddess) for years, and chanted several mantras on a daily basis (Hong Sau, Om namah Shivaya, Gayatri mantra). I don't actually know what nondualist Vedanta would say about stillness. I stopped relying on shakti to do everything for me because that felt lie a crutch and it didn't lend towards me building discipline - I am too free form already. I got into too much of a devotional attitude towards shakti as Kali, Durga, Mahashakti, etc. and this felt too much like 'looking for mommy to come hold my hand.' Plus I came to realize that there are many advantages to being a spiritual tourist, as long as you spend enough time in each system. I almost joined the Krishna devotees when I was in Oregon, and spent much time at their ashrams. I love Krishna still actually. It isn't as if the underlying tenets to these systems aren't the same anyways. I doubt that any Buddhist or Taoist could read Patanjali's Sutras and not respect him as an adept. I feel that my spiritual 'tourism' is coming close to finish soon - I wish to explore Vajrayana Buddhism and Taoism intensely. I really respect the Kama Sutra's recommendations that a well polished individual should master the 60 arts...I have been working on this without trying. I have to say that I am still guided by shakti in the end anyways - 'she' takes your desires and drives you to them and through them, exhausting them so you move on to even better desires, all the while approaching that zenith that everyone talks about. While I have urges towards bodhisattva-ism, I am also very self-oriented, as in I would prefer to scale the heights and see what is out there before I make big vows. I respect the dangers and the fast track of Vajrayana, but for some reason I would like to have an official initiation into this tradition before pursuing it to any great degree. Taoism, on the other hand, is the 'religion' that I said that most resonated with me when I was in the sixth grade and just starting to formally study religion, although I grew up Christian. I consider myself a Sufi-universalist too! One could say I am confused, if one didn't know that I am not attached to attaining anything specific yet. So many people in a hurry to end their confusion and attain no-mind, as if they can't take the heat. I thrive on mental insanity. I have to too - for I am a manic depressive of pretty extreme measure, hence the going overboard. If I resisted my insanity, I would be a goner - instead I roll with it, whether passionately excessively, or void of feeling, I have found a secret to not taking life so seriously and being a clown ninja. I truly believe and have for years that we are all immortal, and that in time, all things will be experienced (over and over again). So I don't try to fake until I make it, out of fear that I will miss out on something big, mainly because I don't have that fear. And also, there is this: I am unemployed, and its like -15 degress outside, and I have nothing better to do! hehe...I am not Bodhidharma, able to stare at a rock wall for 9 years (yet). I am willing to go there however, and I have a funny feeling that I may end up there someday. I am being cooked by forces other than my own desires and I am fine with that. I may as well do this versus read the news or watch TV as I have already noted. I don't think that the things I say here are anything special beyond shooting the shit. That's why I don't take it seriously.

The whole basis of my argument is that there are no absolutes. I state this as absolute! As this is the root of the 'stillness debate,' in my view, we could always go onto to this discussion and cut to the chase. FYI - I realize that I have derailed this thread a while ago - I will ask to have the derailed sections moved to a new thread appropriately titled "There are absolutely no absolutes..." where one can argue 'absolute stillness,' 'absolute truth,' or 'absolute whatever.'

yes! let's play then: There are no absolutes. This statement is an absolute statement. It thus contains the seed of its own destruction. All things contain the seeds of their antithesis. Yin contains a Yang seed Yang contains a Yin seed. Stillness contains the seed for motion Motion contains the seed for stillness Ignorance contains the seed for enlightenment Enlightenment contains the seed for ignorance No thing stays the same. Change is endless. Endless change is changeless. It will never stop and so thus remains the same. This would seem to be the antithesis to 'no thing stays the same' until you stop labeling change as a 'thing' in the first place. Change doesn't exist if time doesn't exist. Things could still exist though, in a timeless place (weird things!), but they would not be able to move without time. However, in a timeless place, there is no awareness of things, as awareness of things takes motion (of energy). Awareness of things depends on time. It depends on motion. Also on space. The only way awareness could ever contain stillness is if there is something that is still to be aware of. The content of consciousness is empty of permanent nature. There is no thing. There is nothing in the universe which has any permanent essence. Everything is in constant flux.. If perception of stillness exists, it is not permanent. Perceptions aren't permanent. ".Nirvana means "blown out" (as in a candle) and refers, in the Buddhist context, to the imperturbable stillness of mind after the fires of desire, aversion, and delusion have been finally extinguished. With the experience of nirvāṇa the mind has ended its identity with material phenomena and experiences a sense of great peace and a unique form of awareness or intelligence that is called bodhi in Buddhism," Nirvana is considered a 'state' reached by a person, according to the Buddha. "There is, monks, that plane where there is neither extension, nor motion, nor the plane of infinite ether.... nor that of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, neither this world nor another, neither the moon nor the sun. here, monks, I say that there is no coming or going or remaining or deceasing or uprising, for this is itself without support, without continuance in samsara, without mental object - this is itself the end of suffering. There is, monks, an unborn, not become, unmade, uncompounded, and were it not, monks, for this unborn, not become, not made, uncompounded, no escape could be shown here for what is born, has become, is made, is compounded. But because there is, monks, an unborn, not become, unmade, uncompounded, therefore an escape can be shown, for what is born, has become, is made, is compounded." If someone speaks of stillness in relation to this above description, I will get to that...but firstly, remember that the Buddha made mistakes, such as recommending that monks meditate on inevitable death of the body and its 'grossness,' whereby a few of them went and killed themselves. He also ate some food gone bad, which seems suicidal, and later defended himself by saying that he did it so as not to upset the woman who gave him the food, which is plain silly. My point being that the Buddha was still subject to ignorance. There are plenty of more examples of that. Mahayana schools, especially Prajñaparamita and Zen traditions state that Nirvana is in fact no different from samsara, and samsara the same as nirvana. There is no path and no goal. So according to those traditions there is no stillness, unless you consider samsara to be still. I would finish...but my yang just plummeted....everything in its time... I will end with this though: concepts are relative. Stillness/motion is a concept and thus relative. Concepts on the ultimate level are false (I won't try to support this now but I can later). But this doesn't matter for my point. In order to be still, you must be still relative to something that is not still. To relate to something else means that there is more than one thing. When there are two or more things, there is movement if you are assuming time/space, which I am. Also, in a universe of relativity, everything is related to, and thus joined to everything else. In fact, every 'thing' is part of every other 'thing,' co-dependently 'originating' from a stance of nonorigination (endless/beginingless). You cannot truly separate anything. Thus, unless every thing were still, nothing could be still, because no thing could be just that thing and nothing else. There is nothing which is independently existing. Not Buddha, who should be killed. Not awareness, which depends on having something to be aware of. There is always going to be at least two things. Therefore, in time (and the space of awareness), there will always be fluctuations, even if it's a repetitive, wave-like fluctuation of infinite bliss, wisdom, and other things of nirvana-like nature. To be absolutely still would absolutely kill awareness, which depends on movement. Also: Every duality, when seen from the nondual perspective, is like a single coin...or a YinYang if you prefer. To say that one part of the pair could exist without the other is like saying that you could cut a coin in half from the view of the coronal plane and thus rid the coin of one-half of its nondual 'pair.' Or could you cut the Yang out of the Yin? You could never cut motion away from stillness...thus, no absolutes in dualistic thinking, and none in nonduality as well. In nonduality, both polar/relative opposites merge into one 'thing' - thus nothing is still and nothing is not still; nothing is not still and nothing is not not still. All possibilities exist, just not all possibilities! Excuse the Zen persona, but I have a few Zen bones in me.

"There is no absolute stillness as there is no absolute viewpoint." I think that unless one is outside of time, there could only be a perception attainment of stillness. It wouldn't be an absolute perception attainment of absolute stillness, because that would indicate that one never came out of that perception state, in which case that person wouldn't be around to talk about it - they'd be somewhere else.. I will continue to discuss this if anyone is interested, since I was the one who brought it up, but,it really isn't that important at all to anyone, as far as I can see. It's one of those things that 'knowing' the answer to won't really matter in the short or long run - like knowing why the sky is blue!