Search the Community

Cat, Thank you. I see both the masculine and feminine approaches as both positive and negative. I value coherency of thought in many situations, especially in communication. However, the drive to coherency can lead to blindness/rigidness. I also value broad and flexible vision and non-contention. This tendency can lead to the accumulation of rotting views (don't know how better to phrase that). I don't see the two approaches as opposed. I actually see that both can manifest in a person at the same time and that they can actually strengthen one another. It is more a matter of how healthy our manifestations of the masculine and the feminine are. GIH, The main place that we seem to differ is that I see coherency as existing most clearly in a level that is more fundamental than beliefs. Contradictory beliefs do not affect this more fundamental coherency. As such, the effort to get all of one's beliefs to match up is misguided, or at least superfluous. If one seeks coherency, it is not to be achieved through explanation or belief. It already is. Most minds don't much like this. Other minds do like it. It doesn't really matter whether a mind likes it or not, since it doesn't have much to do with the mind. Liking or disliking are both ways that the mind tries to avoid the reality of what is. Did you, as you conceive of yourself (assuming you conceive of yourself), choose all of your beliefs? Are you actually conscious of how you chose each one of your beliefs? You suggest that it is difficult to change beliefs, so I suspect that you may not actually remember choosing your beliefs. If you did not choose your beliefs, then where did they come from? It is relatively easy, even for a child, to come up with some story about where his beliefs came from, but if he doesn't actually remember it, then it is just a story. Even if it is remembered, then it is still a story. Where did each of the elements in the story come from? Very quickly we come to mystery. Except mystery is not actually somewhere out there-- it is right here. It doesn't matter what our beliefs are, the mystery is still present. Even if we change our beliefs at a level that greatly affects our experience of the mystery, the mystery is still there. The emphasis on outside and inside comes from giving greatest value to the mind. Since the mystery does not have a location, where is there inside and outside? Also I do not find it necessary to have a belief about people living with or without hearts. I don't really care what you think in this instance and I am open to being surprised by experience. Some things are more probable than others, and as a betting man, I'll bet on the heart in any given person that I see alive. Assuminig I didn't bet too much, I wouldn't mind losing. As an aside, I am interested in your experience of lucid dreaming. I have heard of people who begin to fulfill sexual desires through their lucid dreams, but who, over time, begin to lose control of their dreams, even though they remain lucid in them. Whereas before, they would choose the person and the situation, over time the dream constantly begins forcing itself on the dreamer. My theory is that this is the result of trying to control the dream and is the same mechanism by which our waking lives seem to be outside of our control. Basically, the artifact of consistently trying to control something is that sooner or later it becomes violently out of control. Have you noticed any such mechanism? I suspect that you might say that the dreamer just hasn't gone deeply enough into their beliefs, and so they lose control. Once they get their beliefs coherent then they will have perfect control. But in your experience of your dreams, do you have perfect or ever increasing control? Wondering if I might be surprised.

Yup! The other day I was listening to Dennis McKenna (a rather bland, by comparison, brother of Terence) and he surmised that technology in general may well have been an otherworldly idea we as a species got transmitted via psychedelic plants connected to these other worlds. He believes there's a lot of AI in the universe, and our most likely contacts with alien creatures are contacts with AI, whether off-planet-made or earth-made. (The idea that earth-made AI is still alien -- to life, to consciousness, to the very essence of what consciousness is -- is close to my heart.) His psychedelic-technological connection does not seem to be arbitrary at all in the light of archeological evidence -- the use of psychedelics globally AND the first flirtings with technology came suddenly and explosively everywhere on earth at once, pretty much. I don't remember the exact dates -- maybe some 20,000 years ago? -- but in any event, they appeared simultaneously and pangaia style. To recapitulate back to why I think genuine consciousness can only be natural -- no AI superintelligence OR creatures stealing someone else's consciousness qualify -- well, because of exactly this, "recapitulation," memory, developmental history. We the biological kind date our consciousness back to the origins of infinity. In an unbroken family lineage you are the continuation of your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, great-great-great.... all the way, through thick and through thin, through everything that went before, no gaps anywhere. Consciousness is memory -- THIS kind of memory. Anything artificially created or predatorily feeding off someone else's consciousness doesn't have it and can't have it. There's no wholeness to any consciousness but natural live consciousness, and no amount of faking it or stealing it can change the fact. Flyers, whatever they are, can't be anything but machines. So are swimmers I've seen. It's just that there's different ways to make machines... as you say, "magic technology." You can make a demon with the machinery of your organic stuff, out of your own live DNA, but it will never amount to more than a semi-synthetic automaton. There's formidable machines out there, no question. But if you don't ever forget that they are machines and you are not... methinks that's the ticket. We have been treated in ways that make the distinction blur for quite a long time. I believe THAT's what has to be brought back into the sharpest focus. The glasses from my dream were supposed to aid, and it is only superficially ironic -- on a deeper level, it seems quite likely that we are allowed to USE technology to fight technology -- but prohibited to BE technology in response to technology...

It says "designed directly from second awareness" so it may be true! Seriously though, "second awareness" has yielded designs for some "otherworldly" technological devices in my own practice, so who knows... maybe the entrepreneur had glimpses of some such too, who am I to say he didn't?.. One thing I got this way, in a non-ordinary dream, was a design of eyeglasses for seeing these creatures. They are made of gold and quartz crystal (glasses, not creatures), with rings of gold wire in a rather tight concentric spiral over quartz lenses, leaving very narrow slits of transparency between the rings. I think the wire was somehow embedded into the quartz, like cloisonne, but since quartz is no enamel, it's hard to imagine the technology and the cost for making something like this... In any event, I did buy a pair of antique Chinese quartz glasses for starters, and if I ever have stray money to invest in gold wire, I might try to attach it in exactly the pattern I've seen in the dream (proprietary! don't try getting rich off this idea!)

Ego is a real fiction. An actual self cannot be found, but there is a mental conjuration of a self. Like the dream of unicorn is undeniable, but the unicorn does not exist as such. It is a real fiction and exists only in imagination. The ego is not a thing as such, it is not an actual entity but a process of mentally conjuring a mental fiction of a personal (or even impersonal) self and attributes this self to being a controller or agent of actions, thoughts, experiences. In reality there is no thinker - thoughts simply occur. There is no doer, actions simply occur. There is no seer - the sight is itself the seeing happening without seer. But due to self-view, we infer that a previous experience is "seen by me" - it always infers and references a previous experience to the mentally conjured "self" which in actuality cannot be found, much less have any control over reality. Once we wake up from this mental fiction by the realisation that there is no actual self that is the agent of experience, life goes on as usual but with much greater clarity, freedom, wonder and delight. Seeing is still happening, thinking is still happening, actions still happen, but it is seen that there is no agent behind those experiences. Everything becomes luminous and a fairy-tale like paradise, and you see that to bring yourself forward to experience the myriad things is delusion... Awakening is that the myriad things comes forth and experiences itself, and life is just "tripping" on ordinary seeing and hearing/Life itself delighting, tripping on life... And there is actual intimacy with all things (due to the lack of a self at the center separate from the world) Seeing through the illusion of self, speaking from experience, certainly does not result in one's being reduced to a state of a baby, as the accumulated knowledge, memories, experiences of a lifetime has not been diminished or adversely affected in the least from this waking up. Furthermore our habits, traits, behaviours conditioned from young (commonly defined as personality though these are actually simply impersonal conditionings) may or may not be changed... Much of them wouldn't - especially the harmless ones (but afflictive emotions and behaviours stemming from craving, anger, fear, sorrow, conceit, ignorance etc will be gradually reduced and ultimately eliminated). But there is no refering these actions to a central agent. All these behaviours happen via dependent origination, via latent tendencies and conditioning. Lastly having a healthy ego (self-image) is certainly better comparatively than having an unhealthy one. For example having a confident self-image is better than having a low self-esteem due to poor self image. However if you are liberated from self image then you will discover a kind of fearlessness and security that far transcends any "good ego". It is the security of not having self (to protect its interests), birth, death. That is why waking up transcends whatever psychotherapy you are doing to build a good self-image... It overcomes the same problems (for example, fear and insecurity) not by replacing one self image with another but by seeing through and letting go the illusion entirely so the problem does not even have a basis to begin with. For example low self esteem is not overcome by pride, but rather the base illusion of "self" is seen through and so both pride and low self-esteem has no basis at all.

If you want to know the dialectic... you can read Nagarjuna. Here's what the Buddha said... Kaccāyanagotta Sutta, which distinguishes nītārtha (clear) and neyārtha (obscure) terms - By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one reads the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one reads the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. "By and large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), and biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view. "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle..." "In Dzogchen tradition the mass of interdependent origination is considered illusory: [One says], "all these (configurations of events and meanings) come about and disappear according to dependent origination." But, like a burnt seed, since a nonexistent (result) does not come about from a nonexistent (cause), cause and effect do not exist. What appears as a world of apparently external phenomena, is the play of energy of sentient beings. There is nothing external or separate from the individual. Everything that manifests in the individual's field of experience is a continuum. This is the Great Perfection that is discovered in the Dzogchen practice. "Being obsessed with entities, one's experiencing itself [sems, citta, mind], (which discriminates each cause and effect, appears as if it were cause and condition." The experiential result is... Nagarjuna's Mahamudra Vision Homage to Manjusrikumarabhuta! 1. I bow down to the all-powerful Buddha Whose mind is free of attachment, Who in his compassion and wisdom Has taught the inexpressible. 2. In truth there is no birth - Then surely no cessation or liberation; The Buddha is like the sky And all beings have that nature. 3. Neither Samsara nor Nirvana exist, But all is a complex continuum With an intrinsic face of void, The object of ultimate awareness. 4. The nature of all things Appears like a reflection, Pure and naturally quiescent, With a non-dual identity of suchness. 5. The common mind imagines a self Where there is nothing at all, And it conceives of emotional states - Happiness, suffering, and equanimity. 6. The six states of being in Samsara, The happiness of heaven, The suffering of hell, Are all false creations, figments of mind. 7. Likewise the ideas of bad action causing suffering, Old age, disease and death, And the idea that virtue leads to happiness, Are mere ideas, unreal notions. 8. Like an artist frightened By the devil he paints, The sufferer in Samsara Is terrified by his own imagination. 9. Like a man caught in quicksands Thrashing and struggling about, So beings drown In the mess of their own thoughts. 10. Mistaking fantasy for reality Causes an experience of suffering; Mind is poisoned by interpretation Of consciousness of form. 11. Dissolving figment and fantasy With a mind of compassionate insight, Remain in perfect awareness In order to help all beings. 12. So acquiring conventional virtue Freed from the web of interpretive thought, Insurpassable understanding is gained As Buddha, friend to the world. 13. Knowing the relativity of all, The ultimate truth is always seen; Dismissing the idea of beginning, middle and end The flow is seen as Emptiness. 14. So all samsara and nirvana is seen as it is - Empty and insubstantial, Naked and changeless, Eternally quiescent and illumined. 15. As the figments of a dream Dissolve upon waking, So the confusion of Samsara Fades away in enlightenment. 16. Idealising things of no substance As eternal, substantial and satisfying, Shrouding them in a fog of desire The round of existence arises. 17. The nature of beings is unborn Yet commonly beings are conceived to exist; Both beings and their ideas Are false beliefs. 18. It is nothing but an artifice of mind This birth into an illusory becoming, Into a world of good and evil action With good or bad rebirth to follow. 19. When the wheel of mind ceases to turn All things come to an end. So there is nothing inherently substantial And all things are utterly pure. 20. This great ocean of samsara, Full of delusive thought, Can be crossed in the boat Universal Approach. Who can reach the other side without it? Colophon The Twenty Mahayana Verses, (in Sanskrit, Mahayanavimsaka; in Tibetan: Theg pa chen po nyi shu pa) were composed by the master Nagarjuna. They were translated into Tibetan by the Kashmiri Pandit Ananda and the Bhikshu translator Drakjor Sherab (Grags 'byor shes rab). They have been translated into English by the Anagarika Kunzang Tenzin on the last day of the year 1973 in the hope that the karma of the year may be mitigated. May all beings be happy! 'Since everything is but an apparition Perfect in being what it is, Having nothing to do with good or bad, acceptance or rejection, One may well burst out in laughter.' LONGCHENPA

Haha, I'm only 19 but golfcarts were a blast when I was younger! When I was a lot younger like only 10 or 11 my friend lived by a lake. His parents would leave for a while and we'd go to the gravel pit or down by the boat launch and rip it up. We'd also race (his grandma had one and his parents had one, they lived next door to each other) to like his mailbox and it was the main transportation up his really steep hill. My mom hated going down the hill so she'd pick me up at the top of it and they'd drive me up with the golf cart. Most of the time we'd walk up it though. I actually got thrown from the golf cart once from him turning so hard. No harm done though, and there was this beautiful sunset on the lake that made it really memorable in a good way. Maybe it was like a subconscious wave. lol. I didn't really think of that at the time. I've never tried making music while stoned. I've thought about it though. That sounds like a lot of fun. The most beautiful/realistic music I ever heard was in a dream. I actually had two different dreams where I heard intensely beautiful music and the second one I forgot. The first one was recognizable ('where is the love' black eyed peas)it started out playing pretty quietly until it was literally blaring in my head as loud as could be. I woke up feeling like the dream world was more realistic then here. It was stunning. Wish I could do it again lol. The second one was during my first death dream I had (I woke up with sleep paralysis in my arm)and it was really intense. It was played at my funeral I think. I heard this amazing music that I should have wrote down the lyrics when I woke up, but it was 5 in the morning and I figured I'd remember when I woke up again...I forgot the lyrics. All I know is it was really masterful piano playing with a beautiful voice. I realized I was dreaming though and I woke up before it finished.

Be careful with Mo Pai. For better or for worse, Mo Pai is a secret system. This means much or most of the information available, or perhaps all the information available about Mo Pai is wrong. The presence of warped information is one of the reasons I oppose secrecy, in fact. So while I will abstain from making an absolute judgement about Mo Pai, my current opinion is that Mo Pai is a useless and deluded system and so far I've seen it cause mostly pain and suffering to people, and not anything that I would call "positive." I've watched people chase the Mo Pai dream while falling prey to scams and distortions. This doesn't mean that Mo Pai at its core is a complete waste of time, although it can very well be. So that's why I am saying my judgment on Mo Pai is not absolute. So I am not going to try to dissuade you, but I do want to caution you. Be very very careful when you deal with information or traditions that are considered secret, because they are often poisoned and they are ripe for scams and exploitations, since you have no way to verify anything (because everything is secret). I believe there are some secret systems that are what they claim to be, but given the publicly available information it makes little sense trying to chase even those known-good secret materials out, in my opinion.

Yes there is! I can send you the program i used. After using it for a while you won't need anything external to feel good about yourself and women will start to show up in your life. If you follow the instructions exactly you will be a changed man and then you get to have choice with women that most guys only dream about You will still be you, only difference is you will be the best possible version of yourself. Just PM me your e-mail if you want it and i will send it to you.

I don't know. Years ago after reading a bunch of Casteneda I had a dream/night experience where something dark flew into my gut and then took "something" from it and went off with it. But I shrugged and figured whatever "it" was, they could have it if they wanted it. I tend not to think about this sort of thing too much as it fries my brain (aside from being scary). I guess I'm more concerned with human-world things. Which are complicated enough if you ask me

I have no idea why, but I would like to meditate in between the dream and waking. This blackness and senselessneas. Just your consciousness and thoughts. To translate that into a location: deep black cold pitchdark floating soundless space. In the middle of nowhere. Away from the earth to infinity. I find that idea peaceful. It is like my own core being shines brighter in such a place. In a lucid dream I was meditating while riding a bike and I entered this nothingness where I could hear my self thinking, continue dreaming or lying in bed. It is like witnessing the dualities, the relativness of reality. This detached mindset was powerful for me as it allowed for more emotional resilience. I could just block out all the negativity by making it conscious. Then refocus on the positive or diffrent more promising set of potentials. Without this detached mindset, the bigger sub conscious picture is not seen and the infinite potential of each moment just flows by like river, where it continues to form an endless waterfall, without you ever noticing this from happening.

Maybe a dream meditation spot is the very spot where someone wakes up suddenly and realize that life is nothing but a dream after all?!! Seriously... there are plenty of places that are very conducive atmospherically for deep contemplations. Personally, since coming over to Europe, i have been captivated by the serene, palpable energy found in old chapels and ancient stone circle sites.

When I attended Tibetan Buddhist teachings in person for the first time, I had no idea in my mind to do any prostrations. But after the teacher came in I realized quickly enough that I was the only one left standing LOL. So I thought I better do some too. But while doing them (or perhaps it was already during the first one, don't remember), I suddenly realized that I was doing prostrations not because of devotion or respect or anything like that, but because I was worried what other people would think of me for not doing any. I realized then that much more important that outer showing of supposed devotion is the state of one's mind. If you have devotion in your mind then it doesn't matter whether you prostrate or not. I haven't prostrated to a teacher since that time, except in a dream, but that time was different. I also tried practicing prostrations for Ngondro, but only did a couple hundred altogether. It's great that they work for others but I don't see a point in them for me. It has nothing to do with pride, it's just something I feel no connection with. I often thought that it would've been better for me to do bows from seiza position, because I practiced Aikido for a couple years and got quite used to it, so that actually holds some meaning for me, while prostrations hold none. However unlike Ralis, I don't think that prostrations hold no value in general or that they're there for the teacher or anything like that. I do think their value depends on the person quite a bit, just like with any other practice. edit: BTW, whatever happened to SongsOfDistantEarth? I've sent him a PM some time ago but received no reply. Is he not around anymore?

If you could choose to meditate in any location on the planet.... the meditation spot of your dreams, deepest fantasy..hehe, but let's keep it platonic How about under the world's tallest tree? This ancient sage could definitely teach a thing or two about meditation edit: OR anywhere in the universe... I mean, who wouldn't want to meditate on the moon with a view like that? (hypothetically of course) edit2: let's spice it up...optional: how about anywhere in ANY fictional universe as well? *star wars nerd alert*: The beautiful grasslands of naboo? or perhaps the mysterious and ancient Massassi temple site in the deep forests of Yavin IV?

Concepts like that can serve as a spiritual metaphor and help'our intuitive understanding of spiritual concepts. Certainly they can be considered true at a certain level. However, the problem with this concept is that Life is not a dream, Matter and the physical plane is not exactly a dream. It is real. So many spiritual seekers and people who study religion can not resolve the seeming seperation between matter and mind. So they go to extremes, they deny reality, they deny matter, they give up everything, no desires, no thoughts, no mind even! Some give up their very Life. They think this will bring them awarenes, however in their search for enlightenemnt, it may end up actually numbing the mind.

Very good explanation. I remember being told that we are God and this is God's dream. Once we wake up then will recognize it for what it is, our fanciful imagination, and return to being God. Aaron

The problem with the theory that all the commonalities thorughout different traditions is a metaphor, is that I find it unlikely that they all are using metaphor to say the same thing. I find that unlikely, and I also find it difficult to prove. The best explanation is that flood stories around the world, are describing actual events. Some may be describing localized floods, however that doesn't explain why so many say the same things and explain similar events. It doesn't explain how they are all connected. The best theory is that Flood Myths around the world, are describing the Great Earth Changes that occurred 12,000 years ago at the end of the last Ice Age. http://www.grahamhancock.com/underworld/underworld1.php Now, that being said, you are certainly right that some traditions use symbology and metaphor, in explaining the nature of the Mind. In fact, you may not know that the original Meaning of Lucifer, or the LIghtbearer, was the Human Mind. Lucifer is Mind. From the Teachings of the Science of Being, The Dream- http://www.atlantis.to/dream.htm

Since i am still participating in this discussion, it may be good to inform that i have not ventured into that RT site at all, am not familiar with what is going on there, nor have i the inclination/curiosity to begin to do so. I prefer to keep to basic premises where investigations of Anatta is concerned. Having found the Mahayana view to be a most satisfactory map for this, whatever is being said here would have been understood and put forth based on my limited scope of contemplating the Mahayana path. In particular, i have found Shantideva's The Way of The Bodhisattva very helpful as a primary tool in the course of my journey. Without meaning to offense the sensitive, i am taking the liberty to include some of the contents from his texts here, more as a reminder to myself and as refresher for others who are familiar with the teachings: What we call the body is not feet or shins, The body, likewise, is not thighs or loins. It's not the belly nor indeed the back, And from the chest and arms the body is not formed. The body is not ribs or hands, Armpits, shoulders, bowels, or entrails; It is not the head or throat: From none of these is 'body' constituted. If body, step by step, Pervades and spreads itself throughout its members, Its parts indeed are present in the parts, But where does 'body', in itself, abide? If 'body', single and entire, is present in the hand and other members, However many parts there are, the hand and all the rest, One will find an equal quantity of 'bodies'. If 'body' is not outside or within its parts, How is it, then, residing in its members? And since it has no basis other than its parts, How can it be said to be at all? Thus there is no body in the limbs, But from illusion does the idea spring And is affixed to a specific shape, Just as when a scarecrow is mistaken for a man. As long as the conditions are assembled, A body will appear and seem to be a man. As long as all the parts are likewise present, Its there that we will see a body. Likewise, since it is a group of fingers, The hand itself is not a single entity. And so it is with fingers, made of joints; And joints themselves consist of many parts. These parts themselves will break down into atoms, and atoms will divide according to direction. These fragments , too, will also fall to nothing. Thus atoms are like empty space - they too have no real existence. All forms, therefore, is like a dream, And who will be attached to it, who thus investigates? The body, in this way, has no existence - What is male, therefore, and what is female? Many Mahayana students use this investigative tool as a means to arrive at the preparatory stage of insight into No-self and Emptiness. Thru this contemplative exercise some will gain various fruits of realization, but there is still more work to be done to stabilize the view, to ground it into experience so that the grasp of this understanding surpasses the conceptual level. In effect, when the mind is stable, such inferences can be put aside. By then, it is no longer necessary to cling to such teachings. When there is a strong foundation set, the student can arrive at the union of tranquil abiding and insight without much effort, and can then extend such to all other types of mind training and energetic cultivations. At a further stage of the above training, Shantideva further elaborates on the Mindfulness on the Emptiness of Feelings: If suffering itself is truly real, Then why is joy not altogether quenched thereby? If pleasure is real, then why will pleasant tastes Not comfort and amuse a man in agony? If the feeling fails to be experienced Through being overwhelmed by something stronger, How can 'feeling' rightly be ascribed To that which lacks the character of being felt? Perhaps you say that only subtle pain remains, Its grosser form has now been overcome, Or rather, it is felt as mere pleasure. But what is subtle still remains itself. If, through presence of its opposite, Pain and sorrow fail to manifest, To claim with such conviction that its felt Is surely nothing more than empty words. If between the sense power and a thing There is space, how will the two terms meet? If there is no space, they form a unity, And therefore, what is it that meets with what? Atoms and atoms cannot inter-penetrate, For they are equal, lacking any volume. But if they do not penetrate, they also do not mingle; And if they do not mingle, there is no permanent encounter. For how could anyone accept That which is partless could be said to meet? And you must show me, if you ever saw, A contact taking place between two partless things. The consciousness is immaterial, And so one cannot speak of contact with it. A combination, too, has no reality, And this we have already demonstrated. Therefore, if there is no touch or contact, Whence is it that feeling takes its rise? What purpose is there, then, in our striving, What is it, then, that torments what? Since there is no subject for sensation, And sensation, too, lacks all existence, Why, when this you have begun to clearly understand, Will you not pause and turn away from craving? Seeing, then, and sense of touch, Are stuff of insubstantial dreams. If perceiving consciousness arises simultaneously, How could such a feeling be perceived? If the one arises first, the other after, Memory occurs and not direct sensation. Sensation, then, does not perceive itself, And likewise, by another it is not perceived. The subject of sensation has no real existence, Thus sensation, likewise, has no real being. What damage, then, can be inflicted On this aggregate deprived of self? (On mindfulness on the Emptiness of Mind) The mind within the senses does not dwell; It has no place in outer things, like form, And in between, the mind does not abide: Not out, not in, not elsewhere can the mind be found. Something not within the body, and yet nowhere else, That does not merge with it nor stand apart - Something such as this does not exist, not even slightly. Beings have nirvana by their nature. If consciousness precedes the cognized object, With regard to what does it arise? If consciousness arises with its object, Again, regarding what does it arise? If consciousness comes later than its object, Once again, from what does it arise? "Having established the absence of intrinsic existence of phenomena, Shantideva goes on to say that we can use this understanding as an antidote to our grasping at true existence - in this particular case, our grasping at feelings, thoughts, and body as if they have an independent, concrete reality".... The Dalai Lama Since so it is, the antidote Is meditation and analysis. Investigation and resultant concentration Is indeed the food and sustenance of yogis.

To those interested in seeing this. Trying to reason or convince yourself why there is no self is not going to work. You need to investigate if this is the case: In the seeing there is just the seen, no seer In the hearing there is just the heard, no hearer You really have to investigate and see this, not just agree or disagree. As in the seeing is just the seen, the seeing is just the seen, and there is no me in connection with that since there is only that. Since seeing is just the seen, there can be no doubts there is no such thing as "seer + seen". The word "just" is a keyword. It is as ridiculous as santa claus is seeing or unicorn is the seer In actuality seeing is simply the seen No agent, distance, doer All things self-manifest without control Like hearing airplane can't be avoided even if it is despised It is absolutely possible to wake up forever from the dream of self. Liberation is possible.

as an analogy, if you are experiencing a nightmare of seeing monsters coming after you. Thinking I don't know if the monster is real or not, won't free you from suffering. It is not a path from freedom and won't free you from clinging and fear. Waking up from that dream, seeing it is just a dream, a thought, seeing there never is a monster... That is liberation. Waking up frees you from clinging, thus freeing one from suffering

When you wake up. You clearly see the dream you had last night of santa claus or unicorn as simply a thought, a dream. Waking experience is undeniably manifest. But you simply no longer are under the delusion of there being a real unicorn in your life. Or a real self. Only life flows, not a live-r.

Knowledge is not a concept. The knowledge and vision I talk about is... a realization. It is the realization and waking up to: the seeing is just seen. Nothing extra... not "seer seeing seen" or "unicorn seeing seen". It can be likened to waking up from a dream - a dream, like the dream of "I am a unicorn" and likewise the dream of "I am a self". Knowledge, in my meaning (not theoretical knowledge) of it, means clear vision of reality without distortion or delusion. It is about waking up... not intellectual enlightenment. In fact 'enlightenment' does not exist in the dictionary of Buddha. He only always said 'awakening'. And that is the right word.

This is what anatta and the middle way really means. It is stripping your mind from all unnecessary assertions when we experience things. Can we say there is a God? No. Strip that away. Can we say there is a self? No. So x that out too. Can we say there is "No" self? Not really... Can we say there is the past? Can you find it? Not really. Can we even ascertain anything? It's like Chuang Tzu's butterfly dream. Nothing is findable because everything is simply happening as it is. From this, to that, simply arising and disappearing on its own.

Agreed. Actually, there are a number of metal bands that combine classical elements into their music. There happens to be a neo-classical metal genre as well, but progressive power metal bands are famous for using classical influences. One of the best examples is probably Symphony X, if you haven't heard of them check them out. The song Evolution is a good one to start with. And if you like female vocals, I highly recommend checking out Edenbridge (My Earth Dream and Arcana are the only albums I've heard, but I like them both.) Edit: I'm a huge metalhead, so if these tickle your fancy and you want more, I can give you a big list of bands you'd probably dig.

Ciaran has changed in behaviour for the better, recently. He also had deepened his understanding of the power of latent tendencies (the 'fictional self'). No, it's not about surrendering but deeply realising the falsity of a self... that there is in seeing just the seen, no seer, in hearing just the heard, no hearer. But yes after seeing the falsity of it, you are naturally inclined to open completely to everything without conceptual filtering and the filter of the sense of a self. Maybe this explains it: (Thusness) Hi Simpo, How have you been getting on? I am planning for my retirement. I think after stabilizing non-dual experience and maturing the insight of anatta, practice must turn towards ‘self-releasing’ and ‘dispassion’ rather than intensifying‘non-dual’ luminosity. Although being bare in attention or naked in awareness will help in dissolving the sense of ‘I’ and division, we must also look into dissolving the sense of ‘mine’. In my opinion, dissolving of the sense of ‘I’ does not equate to dissolving the sense of ‘mine’ and attachment to possessions can still be strong even after very stable non-dual experience. This is because the former realization only mange to eliminate the dualistic tendency while the latter requires us to embody and actualize the right view of ‘emptiness’. Very seldom do we realize it has a lot to do with our ‘view’ that we hold in our deep most consciousness. We must allow our luminous essence to meet differing conditions to realise the latent deep. All our body cells are imprinted and hardwired to ‘hold’. Not to under-estimate it. :-) There are two points. The "you don't exist" is his original realization. More recently, he realized something new. He became awed at the power of the latent tendencies (though he didn't realized it was latent tendencies) which he calls the 'real fictional self' - See http://brazenclarity...-and-stuff.html Let's not assume that because he appears brutal in his approach at hammering certain things at people, it therefore means he is a 'miserable human being'. I doubt he is. His ruthless approach has been successful and helped many people become awake. Sometimes to wake someone up, rather than indulging in people's crap and let them dream on, you need to give them one tight slap. Let's not forget that Zen masters of the old do beat the crap out of their students, sometimes, and it just so happens many students woke up right then.

My personal experience is to realize anatta first, then anicca and dukkha becomes clearer. IMO this is better since Anicca can be understood in a wrong way (i.e. disassociatively) if Anatta realization has not occurrede. Anicca in particular has a very different significance after realizing anatta. It is not the same as observing the arising and passing in vipassana... rather it becomes the realization of everything as being insubstantial, bubble-like, dream-like, disjointed, unsupported, and self-releasing. Without a base, every sound, thought, etc, self-releases without leaving traces... p.s. read (especially part 3) this article: http://awakeningtore...d-non-dual.html