Search the Community

a quick glance through dream dictionary and I come up with the following (I know you are looking for the: what happened to intention, but let that go for a sec) rat dog : jealous untrustworthy friend fear; if it was sudden it indicates success, or else uncertainty gun, shooting; bad luck, envy shoot; person unhappy due to anothers egoism aim; sexual pleasures balcony; bad news or a friend who's not there for you throw; trying to get rid of floating: overcome your troubles air: good luck maybe you will be able to see the actual mechanism of intent if you can identify the sequences in your wake life. who or what is a friend? shrug

Hmm... so you say it's a common thing? I understand perhaps when dream characters are sturdier than we imagine them to be... but how do you explain my hand not acting 100% on my intent? I've never felt anything like that except when I was hypnotized one time. Hmm... yes I do remember one time my hands were doing things seemingly outside my volition when I was hypnotized during a stage hypnotist show. But at that time I was able to shake off the hypnosis and regain control, although it wasn't easy to shake it off. As for danger, I don't feel it. I feel it's pretty safe. I think you're saying it's a bad omen. I don't think it is a bad omen at all. I feel like that rat is an important teacher of some sort. How can important teachers be bad? Just because I personally dislike rats doesn't mean it's bad.

Somethings is wrong. Honestly I never thought Gold is heavy would ever consider that a garlic spirit was wanting to teach a lesson. The whole scenario of shooting the crap out of something and its not dying is pretty common in dreams, like lately I dreamt that I shot a "friendly", and even it was shot with a bazooka, it wouldnt stop. That was a weird dream that Im chalking down to past life issues. My feeling on your words is something needs to be really attended to urgently.

You might be right. So I should embrace the rat qualities in myself? Well, this explains why I wanted to get rid of the rat. It doesn't explain why the rat was so seemingly magical. It wouldn't fall down and it miraculously was exempt from my attempts to aim at it. Maybe I should have tried to befriend it, but I wasn't lucid in that dream. I was basically on autopilot and I couldn't really make conscious decisions. I really wanted to play more with that rat, but sadly I woke up.

right where it belongs See the animal in his cage that you built Are you sure what side you're on? Better not look him too closely in the eye Are you sure what side of the glass you are on? See the safety of the life you have built Everything where it belongs Feel the hollowness inside of your heart And it's all right where it belongs What if everything around you Isn't quite as it seems What if all the world you think know Is an elaborate dream? And if you look at your reflection Is that all you want it to be? What if you could look right through the cracks would you find yourself - find yourself afraid to see? What if all the world's inside of your head Just creations of your own? Your devils and your gods all the living and the dead And you're really all alone? You can live in this illusion You can choose to believe You keep looking but you can't find the woods While you're hiding in the trees

Yes but... 'experience becomes just arising moment to moment' is the experience even at anatta phase. The realization 'that things are empty and nothing is ungraspable' further sees these arising as non-arising, empty, unlocatable and ungraspable.... being like an illusion, a mirage, a dream, a magical apparition.

Not the same. But D.O. seen in real-time, non-conceptually, is Maha - everything is like the universe doing this and everything is seamlessly interconnected (everything is the total exertion of the universe), and furthermore everything reveals itself to be dream-like, ungraspable, as an experience.... not as a concept to be held on to. There are just shapes and colours and ... but there is nothing solid or inherent to them.

You can analyze your dreams as some sort of journalling and observation of your ego, if you can't find lucidness. Then you can practice being lucid in waking life to change your believes and realities in subtle ways during waking life. But getting lots of lucid dreams, even if they only last a few seconds, can be very useful. It allows you to get familiar with the lucidness and understand what it really means. To get lucid dreams, I recommend sleep in long periods like atleast 10 hours. The longer you sleep, the longer and more vivid your dreams become. Awakening for seconds or a minute is no problem, as long as you do not disturb the dreamingnprocess too often. The lucid dream is like a finishing touch of your sleeptime. It is so vivid and strong that it stimulates the mind to be more aware. Suddenly you recognize the illusions and change realities. I have not been able to understand why, but around after 11-12 hours of sleep I always become lucid naturally without any effort on my part. Perhaps its just how we're evolved. However, I believe a good slave would never be allowed to sleep more then 8 hours in order to remain tired and dull. This way it will never cross his/her mind that he is dreaming. This way the master can control the reality of the slave trough stuff like commercials very easily. It is prone to accept and submit into fake realities when one is tired and deprived of sleep. You need to sleep in order to wake up.

1. I can only agree to "Awareness is." based upon the presented evidence. I can agree to "contextual" to some degree, but you'd have to clarify your meaning. "Intentional" is tricky. 2. That depends on how you define meaning. 3. Yes. 4. Yes, depending on how you answer 2. 5. No, you would first have to demonstrate a equality between the type of meaning that awareness gives and existence. You would have to demonstrate that there is no existence beyond such meaning. 6. Agree, though the imaginary can affect the real, and in a dream raising your heartbeat, or an imagined plan being brought into fruition, or imagined threat causing a change of plans, or the causing the diversion of the mind from truth. In that sense it can be the source of real effects. In that sense, it can be said to be a source of real.

amusing lil rant. (i wish i had yer falling down laughing emoticon to insert here) however here on TTB i do see alot of this "faster than ever" or the fastest way to whatever mentality that is not productive in anyway. patience, perserverance, practice actually does work better imo. it is unfortunate that there are frauds that do bring shame on themself. they do not bring shame on tai chi itself. if a true master steps up and volunteers for your "scientific proof test" cool, if none do, that is cool too. looks like you have many interests and acheivements you are not looking to add the title of taiji master to your resume'? becoz i am thinking that to be such a thing truly, is to commit to it entirely and exclusitively and not as a sideline hobby. it is a great healthy hobby for sure, it feels good to do, it looks cool. i hear many who say "well i have x number of years study in this or that" how many hours does one have in it? hours each day every day. it has to become one's life. it is common that many folks want to get somewhere without having to do what it takes to get there. if you dont eat tai chi, drink it,breathe it, sleep it, dream it, ponder on it, take it to a spiritual level, why expect to become great at it? i hate cliche' but there are something to cliche' that made them a cliche' , i reckon. but however you say it > when you are ready to find your teacher , that teacher will appear or find you. that article on readiness by sifu jenny

the dream trauma thread is interesting but i don't know any of the terminology or have ever studied any of it . i do use the terms dreams, dreamworld, and my concept of astral plane. lucid dreaming? maybe i do that sometimes but i never looked up the definition for it. i also make a clear distinction between dreams and spirit world but sometimes they intermingle. a few of my kung fu bros here and i have shared dreams many times. it still continues. i have also had this experience with others from time to time. i never thought too much about it but just thought it is a curious experience.

Yes... I thoroughly agree with what is being said there. Dependent Origination is a very subtle and profound truth... in fact it is one of the most profound and fundamental teachings of the Buddha that underpins all his other teachings - including and not limited to the four noble truths, the teachings of emptiness, and so on. The thorough realization of dependent origination is what results in liberation. Lastly, even though it is not good to be attached to anything including lineages and teachers, nevertheless, pure lineage is important as I have quoted from the Dalai Lama - and a teacher who is the embodiment of the pure lineage, and who can transmit the dharma. In a sense all teachings are expedients like a raft - for the purpose of abandoning our delusions and attachments and not for the purpose of clinging on (to the raft) - and yet without the raft, we cannot obtain the perfect awakening of Buddhahood. This is not only the case for Vajrayana... even in Zen, the 1st Ch'an Patriarch Bodhidharma says, http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/C%20-%20Zen/Ancestors/The%20Zen%20Teachings%20of%20Bodhidharma/The%20Zen%20Teachings%20of%20Bodhidharma/THE%20ZEN%20TEACHINGS%20OF%20BODHIDHARMA.htm "To find a Buddha all you have to do is see your nature. Your nature is the Buddha. And the Buddha is the person who’s free: free of plans, free of cares. If you don’t see your nature and run around all day looking somewhere else, you’ll never find a buddha. The truth is there’s nothing to find. But to reach such an understanding you need a teacher and you need to struggle to make yourself understand. Life and death are important. Don’t suffer them in vain. There’s no advantage in deceiving yourself. Even if you have mountains of jewels and as many servants as there are grains of sand along the Ganges, you see them when your eyes are open. But what about when your eyes are shut? You should realize then that everything you see is like a dream or illusion. If you don’t find a teacher soon, you’ll live this life in vain. It’s true, you have the buddha-nature. But the help of a teacher you’ll never know it. Only one person in a million becomes enlightened without a teacher’s help. If, though, by the conjunction of conditions, someone understands what the Buddha meant, that person doesn’t need a teacher. Such a person has a natural awareness superior to anything taught. But unless you’re so blessed, study hard, and by means of instruction you’ll understand." A true lineage has time-tested techniques, experience, teachings, of countless yogis through thousands of years... therefore, never underestimate the importance of true lineage.

Thanks for the replies, everyone! Interesting discussion about timelines there (thanks for the book recommendation Taomeow, I'll try to get my hands on a copy soon.) I've had a lot of dreams that were terrifying, that I would label "nightmares," but taken outside of the emotional context of the experience they seemed to lack anything worth being terrified about. I don't have nightmares much anymore...the last one I had was many months ago. I don't remember much about it, I just remember waking up screaming. I have this feeling that some of my fears and triggers are related to dream experiences. It seems like understanding the connection(s) could be useful and informative.

Hey Aaron, I don't think that science and Buddhism are in the least incompatible. Science's main philosophy is emptiness, never deciding that you are right, just closer to a useful working model. Certainty is the death of innovation, of creativity, in science. The goal of science (as I understand it) is not to become certain, but to explore. Einstein did his work, in what he called a day dream, trying to imagine what the universe would seem like, from the perspective of a photon. The concept of Relativity, BTW, is about surrendering certainty, saying: there is no correct or absolute viewpoint. Testing, of course, seeks to reduce vagueness, and increase accuracy but the emotional aspect of I insist that this is right, is anathema to science. I agree that emptiness is not necessarily getting rid of ideas or beliefs (I certainly don't know how to live without them), although I they think many do fade with time, because they mean less and less. But I do think that detachment is very much about surrender of certainty. What is letting go of attachment to an outcome? It's letting go of the certainty that one outcome is the right one. Certainty invents good and bad, right and wrong. If you really think about it, certainty is an emotional quality, more than an intellectual one. Certainty is the clenching that says: it must/must not be! I insist!

it is not "almost"... It IS a unity. While appearing, it is empty of inherent existence... While empty, appearances are diverse. Appearance-emptiness, like an illusion, like a dream, like a magician's trick.

1. Why does it matter? Do you think the first brush stroke of a painting would somehow disclose the essence of the painter? What it matters is that there is an aspect of reality that you are ignoring, and this has its outcomes. There is a time at which this might be very useful, but there is a time at which it is harmful. It also matters because you claim that appearance and Undivided Light are separate. If this is so, and Undivided Light is the only thing that is real, then how is it that appearance arises? Your account does not take into account an aspect of everyone's experience, including your own, and so it is very partial, which is kinda opposite of your claim to Wholeness. 3.No,...the confusion appears to be that you do not understand opposites. The sum of opposites is always zero,...just as all negatives added to all positives is 0. In the reality of duality, the inbalance of opposites is the condition for endless manifestation. What would occur if a see-saws lever was in balance,...motion would cease. All phenonena is in motion. Stop the motion, and all phenomena ends. Opposites in life are not like abstract opposites. They are not like mathematical sums, in which there are only two types of values. Zero in life is all that we see, all that we have seen, all that we might see, and beyond. It is many dimensions, many dualities, many ways that balance can be explored. It is appearance. Now in appearance there are local variations, local imbalances, and this causes motion in many levels of existence, if any motion can be said to happen, which it can. The motion is not ultimate, but it is apparent. Overall balance in no way denies local imbalance, and in no way denies appearance. It is the balance that allows the appearance. Lets take another example. Humans have many different desires. I would say we have many different desires, but I can't speak for you. There are desires for food, sex, acceptance, survival, control, peace, love, friendship, to express compassion, to know, to gnow, for truth, for energy, for death, for happiness, for the ending of desire, to desire more... it goes on and on. Not all of these desires oppose one another, but at times they appear to be opposed, such as a desire for sex and a desire for social acceptance, if that sex is not socially acceptable. Indulging in the sex can lead to loss of social acceptance, which then could reduce the sex. In other situations, indulging in the sex can increase social acceptance, and lead to an increase in sex. Some desires are pretty much directly opposed, such as the desire for survival and the desire for death. As long as these desires are all operating and keep themselves relatively in check, then a human can live a "normal" life. They don't die early, and they can have a variety of experiences. If one desire becomes out of balance and dominates the others, such as a desire for alcohol to the exclusion of all else, it usually has a very negative effect, and the person can die early, and then that particular manifestation, that particular appearance, is ended early. Imbalance ends the appearance. The greater the imbalance, the quicker the appearance ends. Balance maintains it. In this sense every desire can be said to serve the others, because they give the context within which the others can be experienced. Some people like to try and boil all desires down to one of the desires, and for most of them you could have a compelling argument that all of the other desires are really just forms of that one desire. This is not because they really are just forms of one given desire, but because they interpenetrate and make one another possible. So, in life, balance is essential for appearances. It is imbalance that ends appearances. Conceptually, and experientially, it seems that all of this revolves around nothing, but I haven't known all aspects of all things individually, or done the sum of them all, so this is just another seeming as far as I'm concerned. Even if everything seems to to disappear, or it just directly is "gnown" to be nothing. More seeming, more "gnowing". 4 Yes, the idea or concept of the Unconditional is thought (ego), but that does not deny the reality of the Unconditional. Nor does the idea of the non-separation of the conditional and the Unconditional being thought (ego) deny the reality of the non-separation of the conditional and the Unconditional. Quantum cosmologists, Steven Hawking and Jim Hartle said that since time loses characteristics that separate it from space, the concept of a beginning in time becomes meaningless. That is to say, there was no Big Bang, no singularity, no creation, no Creator, no beginning nor end, because there is no time. Enlightened Bodhisattva's been saying that for a few thousand years through understanding the Unconditional. And this in no way denies the appearance of time. Or else how could Quantum cosmologists talk about any of this at all? 6. Why are humans so arrogant to believe that the universe would not be without them. Were there humans before dinosaurs? Will there be an earth if Christian Fascists (Tea Party patriots) take over the planet and annilate everyone for Jesus. Is non-sentient consciousness depended on humanity. I never mentioned the universe. I asked if Quantum Physics could be without a sentient being. Quantum Physics is not the universe. It is a model for how particular aspects of the universe work. It is a particularly successful model in some domains, but not in all domains, not even all of the scientific domains, let alone the non-scientific domains. For example, can Quantum Physics make meaningful predictions about compassion or love? Even if it could make accurate predictions in all known domains, it should in no way be construed to be the universe. There is a viewpoint, however, that the universe as a whole has a wave function and that this could never have collapsed into an observable universe without an observer. This observer, or consciousness can be viewed as an inherent aspect of any wave function, which explains the universe's ability to collapse itself into the big bang (assuming I have any idea what I'm talking about. I got this from a youtube clip with physicists talking. ) It is one view. It wouldn't be dependent on humanity, though perhaps you could say more about the apparent division between sentient and non-sentient consciousness, and explain if sentient consciousness can actually be separated from non-sentient consciousness. 7. Yes, Unborn Awareness can be observed, just not through the skandhas. The 6 senses can only observe motion,...so obviously, the observer of the Unborn Awareness, that is, awareness beyond belief, is not of the 6 senses. Nothing can be GNOWN through the skandhas,...but only KNOWN. Gnowledge does not arise from the brain,...only knowledge arises from the brain. And no,...time is not needed to recognize the Present,...although through time, the absence of the Present can be recognized. So it cannot be observed in any of the ways that we normally use the word observe; it cannot be known, but it can be gnown. I'll go along with that as long as we both recognize that no formulation of that "gnown" can be owned, grasped, or in any other way held onto, except in a weird twisted way that appears to reduce the "gnowing". With regard to Present, how do you know that time is not necessary? How can something be recognized if there was not a time at which it was not recognized? Re-cognize. Sure there is gnowing before time, but to re-cognize, there must be a moment in which it is not cognized... hence the necessity of time. 8 First,...I'm not into beliefs. Beliefs deny, suppress, disconnect, and disempower. Generally speaking, I'm with you there. Fixation of beliefs eventually does not serve, if it ever serves. One can live passionately without fixation. Through awakened consciousness, the dream of the skandhas is still there, just as the stars continue to be above us during the day,...awakened consciousness is like standing on the lever of a see-saw over the fulcrum, versus anywhere else on the lever. Those that can stand on the lever above the fulcrum 24/7 or called Buddha. We're getting close. That fulcrum can be seen to be the entire lever, without leaving the fulcrum. Or so my experiences are suggesting. I am not at the point where this is my conscious experience 24/7. This is the source of unlimited depth of potential realization, despite the fact that everything is inherently realized, just as it is. 9 I view the Short Path from a different perspective,...somewhat like this: http://wisdomsgolden...s/23/5#section1 That is a long article that you linked to. Could you summarize your position? I am familiar with the Short or Direct Path. It has been my primary approach, especially in the last several years, and also before I knew anything much of Spirituality. A fairly decent summation of the Short or Direct Path as I experience it can be found in this verse: Chapter 22 (Red Pine's translation of the Taoteching): Partial means whole crooked means straight hollow means full worn-out means new less means content more means confused thus the sage holds onto the one to use in guiding the world not watching himself he appears not displaying himself he flourishes not flattering himself he succeeds not parading himself he leads because he doesn't compete no one can compete against him the ancients who said partial means whole came close indeed becoming whole depends on this The last line is essential, but so is the first, and all the ones inbetween. The only words that I don't like so much are "holds onto", but I guess they can have their use in my experience too. 10. Undivided Light is not separate from appearances,...appearances are separated from Undivided Light, which precipitates their motion to unite with Undivided Light, although it NEVER can, because the unreal can never enter the real. Energy is simply the unbalanced, dissymphonic continuum of the desire to return to source, which it never really left. I would agree with the first part if you phrased it as "appearances can appear to be separated from Undivided Light". You judge energy and desire harshly, but, yes it never really left. What occurs, conceptually speaking, when one crosses the threshold of the so-called speed of light? It's helpful for perspective,...because from Light's point of view (which travels no distance, in no time, and thus has no need for speed) we are relatively 186k mps slower than the Stillness of Undivided Light. In other words, everything in duality's reality is in the past. The perceived present, as in your looking at these words, is the past. No object can be seen in the Present, because no objects exist in the Present. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Its not bad news. As per what you said above, the past never left the Present.

1. Why does it matter? Do you think the first brush stroke of a painting would somehow disclose the essence of the painter? 3.No,...the confusion appears to be that you do not understand opposites. The sum of opposites is always zero,...just as all negatives added to all positives is 0. In the reality of duality, the inbalance of opposites is the condition for endless manifestation. What would occur if a see-saws lever was in balance,...motion would cease. All phenonena is in motion. Stop the motion, and all phenomena ends. 4 Yes, the idea or concept of the Unconditional is thought (ego), but that does not deny the reality of the Unconditional. Quantum cosmologists, Steven Hawking and Jim Hartle said that since time loses characteristics that separate it from space, the concept of a beginning in time becomes meaningless. That is to say, there was no Big Bang, no singularity, no creation, no Creator, no beginning nor end, because there is no time. Enlightened Bodhisattva's been saying that for a few thousand years through understanding the Unconditional. 6. Why are humans so arrogant to believe that the universe would not be without them. Were there humans before dinosaurs? Will there be an earth if Christian Fascists (Tea Party patriots) take over the planet and annilate everyone for Jesus. Is non-sentient consciousness depended on humanity. 7. Yes, Unborn Awareness can be observed, just not through the skandhas. The 6 senses can only observe motion,...so obviously, the observer of the Unborn Awareness, that is, awareness beyond belief, is not of the 6 senses. Nothing can be GNOWN through the skandhas,...but only KNOWN. Gnowledge does not arise from the brain,...only knowledge arises from the brain. And no,...time is not needed to recognize the Present,...although through time, the absence of the Present can be recognized. 8 First,...I'm not into beliefs. Beliefs deny, suppress, disconnect, and disempower. Through awakened consciousness, the dream of the skandhas is still there, just as the stars continue to be above us during the day,...awakened consciousness is like standing on the lever of a see-saw over the fulcrum, versus anywhere else on the lever. Those that can stand on the lever above the fulcrum 24/7 or called Buddha. 9 I view the Short Path from a different perspective,...somewhat like this: http://wisdomsgoldenrod.org/notebooks/23/5#section1 10. Undivided Light is not separate from appearances,...appearances are separated from Undivided Light, which precipitates their motion to unite with Undivided Light, although it NEVER can, because the unreal can never enter the real. Energy is simply the unbalanced, dissymphonic continuum of the desire to return to source, which it never really left. What occurs, conceptually speaking, when one crosses the threshold of the so-called speed of light? It's helpful for perspective,...because from Light's point of view (which travels no distance, in no time, and thus has no need for speed) we are relatively 186k mps slower than the Stillness of Undivided Light. In other words, everything in duality's reality is in the past. The perceived present, as in your looking at these words, is the past. No object can be seen in the Present, because no objects exist in the Present. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. V

You may pop into realization of wholeness by denying Yin and accepting Yang, or vice versa, but this is only because within both Yin and Yang is the Whole. You do not succeed in escaping either Yin or Yang, but eventually truly fail, and cannot escape admitting the inescapability of Wholeness. You might then call this Wholeness "True Yang" or "True Yin", but this would only be an arbitrary word choice and not reflect an actual state. There is a point of view in which nothing ever happened, but this is only one side of a duality, the other side being that there is only things happening. The point of view in which nothing ever happened can be thought of as a fulcrum, but inherent within this fulcrum is the happening. So for your analogy to be correct, the fulcrum would need to be within the see-saw and the see-saw would need to be within the fulcrum. The Unconditional depends on conditions for context, or else we could not know it as Unconditional. Conditions are implied by the Unconditional and the Unconditional is implied by conditions. They cannot be separated, and determinations of within and without don't actually apply, since there is no separation by means of which one could say that one is within the other. To say they are within each other is to speak of their interpenetration-- inseparability. Turns out I was wrong about what the colors represent in the Mandlebrot set. The black represents starting values, or locations, that remain bounded, or finite, as they are continually fed back into the equation that is used to determine the colors of the set. The colors represent different speeds at which given starting values escape to infinity as they are continually fed back into the equation. I actually like that arrangement a little bit more, with different grades of approaching infinity on the outside, but it still really boils down to the same thing, an interaction between the infinite and the finite, or the bound and the unbound, or Yin and Yang, if you will. (For anyone who isn't familiar with the Mandlebrot set. The title of the video is not meant to be a dig, Vmarco, just happens to be the best short clip I could find ) The infinite is an implication of zero (a/0=infinity, where a=any non-zero number. To be simple, 1/0=infinity.) I believe elsewhere you have equated zero with Undivided Light, which you call the fulcrum. You say that this fulcrum cannot be found anywhere in the set, but is only suggested, such as when the set "repeats" itself. The set only "repeats" itself at the borders of the finite and the infinite, where they meet and mingle. Time can be thought of as an experience of the finite, and eternity can be thought of as an experience or "gnowing" of that which gives rise to the infinite (i.e. zero). Zero implies the infinite, and the infinite implies the finite, so there can be no experience, or "gnowing" without all of the above. By analogy to the Mandlebrot set, one cannot find the fulcrum without either the infinite or the finite, since the infinite gives context to the finite and vice versa, and it is only through their interaction that we might recognize the deeper fulcrum. This gets back to the question that I asked you before, and you did not respond to: If it were not for human-centric appearance, how could you have recognized something non-human-centric? Or, if it were not for time, how could you have recognized eternity? Don't you find it interesting that you happened upon it in a moment of surrender, and not a moment of denying divided light? Apparently the divided light did not obscure it then, since it arose right in the middle of the divided experience. Is that not so? Yes, it is beyond, but it also includes. If it did not include, how could "gnowledge" of the Whole arise during an experience of any of its parts? If it "gnows" on its own, independent of the parts, then how is it that parts appear? If the parts are an appearance within it, then how is it separate from the appearance? To say that they don't exist is only a point of view and makes no sense, since there is something that we are talking about, even if it is only an appearance. The appearance or the concept or the illusion exists, or else we could not talk about it. Existence is the Dao, which cannot be named. But more concretely, with that caveat, existence is the capacity to experience. The dream of life is an aspect of existence. Balance does not dissolve. It unfolds. See the Mandlebrot set example above. It is the extremes that dissolve into fixed meaninglessness, non-life, though not really. Can Undivided Light really be covered? By what? How did it get separate? If you will, please check out this chapter from the Daodejing, for more from Laozi, pertinent to our conversation and efforts: Chapter 77. The eleventh word should be "down", not "sown". Finding the long and giving it to the world is a good analogy for the going and the return, don't you think? Its non-existence is an extreme view, as discussed above. --- After all the points have been made, let me paint a simpler picture. It often happens that we spend the bulk of our lives fixated upon the divided light, and when we relax this fixation (when we surrender, as you said, or when we let go of effort and remain interested in what is) then the Whole rushes into consciousness. The way this often happens is there is a strong shift to the opposite polarity (the Undivided Light) and that dominates experience for a time, and then something more balanced arises, something more in keeping in with the Whole, from and in which it can express itself quite freely. A very common mistake is to assume that the opposite polarity is where truth is, and what we had seen before was untruth. We then try to shift our experience to this opposite polarity. This can be useful, if we are not too forceful, but only shift our attention to that which we had been ignoring. It helps us to include more of the Whole. But what usually happens (which isn't really wrong) is that we end up ignoring the Whole just as much as before when we try to fixate on the opposite pole of a duality. And then where did our surrender go? And where did the whole go? And where did this struggle come from?

Sure, let's discuss mathematical assumptions. Most people fail to recognize that the foundation of a mathematical statement is only true in relation to the assumptions of set theory, the assumption that any collection of objects actually exists. All objects, without exception, are indeed mathematical. The reason for that lies in the multiplying/dividing nature of the optically organized universe. However, the modern cosmological understanding of the universe suggests that no objects exist, indicating that mathematics pivots on a misguided belief in materialism. The sciences usually expound on relative reality through the assumption that object-ive reality actually exists. However, objectivism is based on objects, and those objects are no more real than last nights dream. To discuss Heart-Mind, there needs to be a vocabulary that points to beyond objects,...beyond irrelevancy of empirical data. The seeing of objects as separate from perceived self is a barrier to Heart-Mind. Thus, the journey to uncovering Heart-Mind is one of unlearning. Heart-Mind does not exist within Math's "set theory" "In pursuit of knowledge, every day something is acquired. In pursuit of wisdom, every day something is dropped." - Lao Tzu

I don't associate dreaming to the brain but the liver. The liver stores the Hun and dreaming is the roaming of the Hun; the dream is the information picked up during it's travels. The ancients taught that the Hun can travel the nine levels of earth and nine levels of heaven. And the Shen (housed in the heart) when fully developed can energetically travel. I don't think it is about the brain.

Thanks for the videos, Sloppy! Not different dimensions, different timelines. (I've glimpsed different dimensions too, but that's a different story.) Timelines and dimensions are not the same. I use dreamwork to access a 3D process which involves multiple timelines without any of them changing dimensionality except on occasion and for a purpose (e.g., a surgery that can't be done in 3D can be done in 4D -- whether physical or an "exorcism" that actually is necessary every single time when a different-dimensionality entity has trespassed and squatted in a 3D being -- but under normal conditions, no 3D creature is comfortable with 4D intruders or in 4D environments, and higher than that -- or lower than that for that matter -- is absolutely unlivable for a human being, I know this for a fact.) 3D+time=a 3D process, not a 4D space. Time is not a dimension "like the rest." Time is part of all dimensions, because all dimensions are processes, not "objects." Yup, you got the interdimensional travel right, but that's not what I do unless forced to (I was forced to on a couple of occasions... I can't handle it. I get dimensionsick much like one gets seasick. Only worse. I might get used to it with practice, the way someone might get over seasickness with practice, but I don't practice this. Maybe someday... if I have to. I'd rather not.) Switching to different timelines is possible without switching to a different dimensionality. I was basically shown how in a dream I had when I was 4. It is indeed awesome but very scary. I'll give you an example of some ordinary everyday activity to illustrate just how scary it is. Imagine you need to get to the supermarket to buy some groceries. It's a ten minute walk, and you are debating with yourself whether you should take a walk or drive there. In our everyday functioning, we create such bifurcations in space-time every time we make a decision, and once the choice is made and the road is taken -- whichever road -- the other option goes extinct, does not cross over to the domain of the manifest and reverts forever to the unmanifest (in taoist terms, does not enter Houtian and reverts to Xiantian). It never happens. It never manifests simply because you made something else happen and manifest. Say, you decide you'll walk, and walk. The whole sequence of events that would have, could have, should have resulted from your driving immediately goes extinct -- the timeline where you took the car to the supermarket goes extinct. You proceed on the timeline you've chosen, the one where you walk. What happened on that timeline that never happened? Maybe nothing to make it much different from the one that did happen -- you arrived three minutes sooner, nothing changed. Or maybe something happened there to change everything -- e.g., a fatal car accident, or alternatively, in the space of those three minutes you met your future wife who was just leaving the supermarket and dropped something and you picked it up and it resulted in children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren -- a timeline of posterity sprouting from that 3-minute window of opportunity. But since you didn't take the car, these and all other infinite versions of different timelines never happened and you can never know the "what if" of any of them. Now then. In reality, this is not the case. In reality, you are something or somebody who can manifest any such timeline at any time in any place, always and forever for all infinity. You are someone who decides to pull a timeline outta Xiantian. If you know how that is. If you do it even once, this changes everything, this changes how you relate to the world you're in -- in particular, this basically renders its timeline which is supposed to be irreversible quite extinct. And that's very very very scary.

"Your access to different timelines is determined by their emotional rather than spacial or temporal proximity. I.e. if you feel you "belong here" and all you want to do is tweak with your position "here," you can learn to lucid-dream in this timeline. But if you feel you "belong elsewhere," you will need to work out the details of this "elsewhere" first. " Interesting. I keep wondering if the interweb might be interfering with my ability to switch over to a world without a certain number of undesirables in it (including mercury in fish and fiat currencies that leave millions up the creek without a paddle). Although it also seems that it's one of the principal channels through which I'm gaining a sense of hope that all is not entirely lost and that big and beneficial changes are on their way in many areas.

Erasing? Or? Or pulling out a dream of being attacked, noticing the malevolent presence still there, and then opening to it and it revealing something beneficial. I don't know that I can recommend it, but it has happened in my experience. I think it was partly conditioned by a recognition of lack of ultimate reality in the malevolent appearance. The appearance wasn't fixed in my mind.

Excellent post,...certainly worthy of critique. The Mind of a Tathagata has never moved. The sentient mind, which aroses from the skandhas, cannot sense that which has never moved,...the sentient mind observes only motion,...from an apparently resting rock, to massive Planets in orbit around the Sun,...all objects are in motion. The Mind of a Tathagata has never moved. Quite frightening for the sentient, sciential mind,...it upsets its logic. Although the phrase "Enlightenment is knowledge of death itself" is common language use, it doesn't ring as well as it could,...for example,....Enlightenment is Gnowledge of death itself. The language to discuss Heart-Mind needs to be more specific. Knowledge arises from the cerebral-mind,...an accumulation of ideas,..whereas gnowledge is an understanding beyond sentience. Inscribed over the portico of the Temple at Delphi in Greece was written Gnothi Seauton—gnow thyself. To the Greeks, gnowledge or wisdom arose through the thymos, located near the physical heart, and associated with the thymus gland. The psyche, located in the gray-goo in the head, was considered of secondary importance. Some cultures like the Egyptian and Maya of Mesoamerica, thought so lowly of the brain, or sciential mind, that before burials it was sucked out and discarded, whereas the heart was treasured. Today's scientially minded may think such a philosophy as primitive, but keep in mind that the Egyptians for example were quite aware of the brain. Evidence clearly shows that the Egyptians had an intimate knowledge of brain functions, for instance that the left cerebral hemisphere controls the right side of the body. As was the case with the tantrika and Vajrayana in Asia, and the Maya of Mesoamerica, Egyptians seemed to have been aware that the brain is the vessel for the lowest consciousness, whereas from the heart arose the highest consciousness. Ancient cultures appear to have discarded the brain because they had a higher awareness of self. Knowledge proceeds through what Buddha called the five skandhas or Aggregates, which includes sensual perceptions and conditioned experience by way of the psyche or personal consciousness. To know is to comprehend noologically, through intellect-based thought. Gnowledge or sapience, from sapientia, is to understand through metasensory awareness and unconditioned experience through the thymos or impersonal consciousness. To gnow is to understand by way of gnosis, the gnowledge that Siddhartha Gautama, the "Sage of the Shakyas," implied when he said, be a Lamp unto Thyself. Of course this is just semantics,...however, semantics are more important to the discussion of Heart-Mind that for a Lawyer, Physician, or Astrologer. Deci Belle wrote, "As one is becoming of heartmind; heartmind is becoming of oneself." This broaches a huge discussion,...for example, how is No Beginning, No end, applicable to our perceived present? The sentient mind looks at a presumed past and theorizes an evolutionary process, a beginning and possible end. The religious minded looks at their Holy Books and theorizes a beginning and no end. It may be impossible for the sentient mind to grasp that time is one, or that evolution may have occurred from the top down, rather than the bottom up. The sentient mind cannot sense stillness,...and yet, stillness, the stillness of consciousness, is who we are,...even for those attached to the dream of motion for their identity. "Do you know?" Deci Belle writes. I'd say that, those who know, do not gnow. V

Dependent origination does not deny reality as we observe it, nor to say that there’s no reality outside the mind, but simply that no ‘reality in itself’ exists. Phenomena only exist in dependence on other phenomena and therefore are empty of any intrinsic characteristics or core. This is the realization of corelessness via the realization of dependent origination. Self-doubt is not liberation. The liberation from all doubts, beliefs and views through experiential realization of the twofold emptiness is what liberation is. And yes, I am not the same as others in one way: I am no longer deluded about inherent existence. And I have no problems with being different - if all my friends take drugs that doesn't mean I should, I don't want to be part of a group just because that condition is pervasive. If you think being deluded into inherent existence and therefore suffer is being normal and "part of the group" and those who are free of it by realizing the twofold emptinesses are "assholes", I'd rather be an asshole by being the free minority. (Oh and I don't see why we are assholes since we actually deeply care about liberating others from delusion and suffering - it is not like we are some elite uncaring group) I do not wish to be the majority of the world who are still suffering and in delusion. And this is what Buddha sets out to teach from the beginning - suffering and end of suffering. P.s. The appearance of thinking isn't denied, but since thinking dependently originates they are ultimately empty. This is the inseperability of the two truths, relative and ultimate. Therefore there is no contradictions whatsoever in my statements. ................. The Heart of Prajna Paramita Sutra When Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara was practicing the profound Prajna Paramita, he illuminated the Five Skandhas and saw that they are all empty, and he crossed beyond all suffering and difficulty. Shariputra, form does not differ from emptiness; emptiness does not differ from form. Form itself is emptiness; emptiness itself is form. So too are feeling, cognition, formation, and consciousness. Shariputra, all Dharmas are empty of characteristics. They are not produced, not destroyed, not defiled, not pure; and they neither increase nor diminish. Therefore, in emptiness there is no form, feeling, cognition, formation, or consciousness; no eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, or mind; no sights, sounds, smells, tastes, objects of touch, or Dharmas; no field of the eyes up to and including no field of mind consciousness; and no ignorance or ending of ignorance, up to and including no old age and death or ending of old age and death. There is no suffering, no accumulating, no extinction, and no Way, and no understanding and no attaining. Because nothing is attained, the Bodhisattva through reliance on Prajna Paramita is unimpeded in his mind. Because there is no impediment, he is not afraid, and he leaves distorted dream-thinking far behind. Ultimately Nirvana! All Buddhas of the three periods of time attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi through reliance on Prajna Paramita. Therefore know that Prajna Paramita is a Great Spiritual Mantra, a Great Bright Mantra, a Supreme Mantra, an Unequalled Mantra. It can remove all suffering; it is genuine and not false. That is why the Mantra of Prajna Paramita was spoken. Recite it like this: Gaté Gaté Paragaté Parasamgaté Bodhi Svaha! End of The Heart of Prajna Paramita Sutra