Musings on psychic surgery

[SeriesOfTubes]

I found that the more Anatta is realized, the more sensual and in touch with my senses I become. The more I realize dependent origination, the more joy I derive from my senses.

 

 

yeah that was one of the reasons I wanted to chime in. it seemed that the concept of no-self was being equated with self denial, monastacism, asceticism etc which I'm pretty sure is not strictly included within of the idea of Anatta, which to me means moment to moment experiencing prior to a redundant pulling away from the immediacy into subject/object thinking.

[Vajrahridaya]

VJ, detach from your conceptual fixations.

 

Actually, because the idea of a permenet self existing and self shining essence of all is exactly the type of conceptual fixation the Buddha debated against being conducive for liberation, I'll offer my help through correction.

 

Even the non-conceptual can be a fixation. Thus Buddhas warning about the 4 formless jhanas and taking any one of them up as a permanent and self existing essence.

 

I, philosophically speaking, don't have any conceptual fixations, because I have experiential understanding of dependent origination which makes this lack of fixation possible. The Buddhas view is the viewless view.

 

To think I'm holding onto a conceptual fixation concerning my correction of fixated views that reflect one extreme or another of either Eternalism like you and Dwai for instance concerning the Buddhist texts, or Kates Nihilism concerning the views presented in Buddhist texts would be reflective of protecting your own fixated view.

[Vajrahridaya]

yeah that was one of the reasons I wanted to chime in. it seemed that the concept of no-self was being equated with self denial, monastacism, asceticism etc which I'm pretty sure is not strictly included within of the idea of Anatta, which to me means moment to moment experiencing prior to a redundant pulling away from the immediacy into subject/object thinking.

 

Right, you're more open, less "self" fixated and more engaged with your environment.

 

 

This releases tremendous energy for the senses, in a deeply uplifting and pleasurable fashion and makes every experience that touches the senses, more clear and vivid or even more visceral.

 

Though one might go through stages where everything feels like an empty cloud! HAHA!

Edited January 4, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[3bob]

Thanks 3Bob. I like this one and I wonder why people wouldn't want to "admit it"?

 

This part has me even more intrigued "They think of the self as within the body. But it is not like that."

 

Would have been more helpful if the sutra got to the point and said what it is like, but apparently that doesn't seem to be the tendency in religions (and in a bunch of other things). Another "I know, but I'm not telling you" joke Which turns out not to be funny.

 

"If something is true, is real, is constant, is a foundation of a nature that is unchanging, this can be called the self. For the sake of sentient beings, in all the truths I have taught, there is such a self. This, monks, is for you to cultivate."

 

Neat quote. What do you reckon "to cultivate" means here? I'd akin it to "cultivation" of consciouness (which IMO and small dubious experience) is the "self" to which the sutra refers.

 

Hi Kate,

Glad the quote was of use to you. I'd say or also add that it means like steadfast-rememberence of what he is pointing to, along with a final degree where rememberence type help methods related to the tools of consciousness are no longer needed since what he is pointing to then fully takes over.

 

Om

[3bob]

Actually, because the idea of a permenet self existing and self shining essence of all is exactly the type of conceptual fixation the Buddha debated against being conducive for liberation, I'll offer my help through correction.

 

Even the non-conceptual can be a fixation. Thus Buddhas warning about the 4 formless jhanas and taking any one of them up as a permanent and self existing essence.

 

I, philosophically speaking, don't have any conceptual fixations, because I have experiential understanding of dependent origination which makes this lack of fixation possible. The Buddhas view is the viewless view.

 

To think I'm holding onto a conceptual fixation concerning my correction of fixated views that reflect one extreme or another of either Eternalism like you and Dwai for instance concerning the Buddhist texts, or Kates Nihilism concerning the views presented in Buddhist texts would be reflective of protecting your own fixated view.

 

On second thought maybe a Buddhist-shrink could be of help to you?

[gendao]

Edited January 4, 2011 by vortex

[Birch]

Thanks for the replies folks.

 

RV, I've been finding that I don't actually need therapythanks to practice. I guess it's become its own "therapy"

 

I think I just need to dig in for myself and find out which parts of my beliefs and behviours are insane (i.e. "misaligned" with reality or desire - whatever that happens to be at the moment it "happens") and which parts of them are sane (i.e. "aligned" with reality" or desire that very same moment).

 

Now I understand that this personal perspective is only ever going to be that (which is why it's worth sharing stuff on TTB's for example, so I can get to see the other sides ) but frankly, how much does that really matter?

 

I guess it matters a lot!

 

Think of where it leads you when you are in conversation with other people or even other countries about this "what's going on" stuff. Think of the harm that can be caused with this "what's going on" stuff.

 

No matter "we" (or rather, those who came before) have set it up to "go on" that way in the first place. Pity the poor children who "arrive" and get told "what's going on" before they can even keep their eyes open for more than 10 minutes.

 

(Can you imagine getting off a plane in a foreign country with massive jetlag, your eyes barely open and having yourself physically taken over but very big "foreigners" who have decided that you are "theirs" for as long as it takes you to escape )

 

And the people keep getting told "what's going on" over and over again for years until they get to a point where it makes absolutely no sense at all. This is IMO the "waking up" point.

 

OR they can't bear that it makes no sense so they will dumb themselves down to that fact by any means possible - including "spiritual" seeking and practice. Thankfully (for who?) there's enough content in most traditions to keep people busy for many years...

 

I guess the "upside" of having this "what's going on" defined for us is that it makes talking about the "what's going on" stuff a relatively easy process because inside it, consciousness is "cultivated" into a particular system of understanding.

 

I guess the "downside" is that people forget all the time that it's just for convenience of communication. (The other question might be "whose convenience"?) Plus they get annoyed when someone comes along and wants to commnicate something different from what they're used to. Especially if that involves the "is" word or causality. Sigh.

 

I "get" the dude Vortex posted about saying "nothing is being done" and I'd even sometimes go as far as saying "nothing is happening" either, but it still is and I take a delight in much of it.

 

But still, there's a bunch of terrible stuff going on as well. Insane stuff. Can one deny that?

 

I'd consider myself half-awake on occasion. It would seem becoming "awake" never "solved" any of it on a global scale, so why bother? Vortex's dude seems to have decided "not to bother" either.

[Vajrahridaya]

I'm thinking that initially, you may try to relieve "your" suffering through bettering your understanding of and choices in worldy life.

 

Both are necessary in practicality.

 

But eventually as you dig deeper, realizing that there is actually no one suffering...is the ultimate relief.He mentions that karma & reincarnation "don't really exist." Whereas I think they do as much as an "ego" or "memories" do - but perhaps not from his final "enlightened" perspective.

 

Like Nagarjunas "two truths" theory, but... still transcended by Dzogchens "one truth" that doesn't inherently exist theory, that's really "the liberated awareness experiencing."

Edited January 5, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

On second thought maybe a Buddhist-shrink could be of help to you?

 

Awesome! I like Buddhist therapists.

[3bob]

What's going on/what's happening brother, Marvin Gaye

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9KC7uhMY9s

 

Edited January 5, 2011 by 3bob

[Birch]

I figured I'd resuscitate this thread to post this:

 

 

Spiritual Bypassing

 

This has to be the best book I've read in a while!

 

Reality rocks :-)

Edited March 25, 2011 by -K-

[unmike]

shutting down Vaj

 

While I understand why some of what he says is quite difficult to grasp, especially for someone typically more oriented to the Taoist, practical view versus the Buddhist, stuffy seeming one, he's quite right about the way dependent origination is the lens through which to view the Buddha's words on these matters. This is almost entirely impossible without first having had a direct experience of dependent origination. Intellectual grasping will always be simply that. It took an accidental, Chia fueled tantric fling for me to really feel it, not just "know" it. Your mileage may vary.

 

As for learning to perceive the awareness outside of what people traditionally call their "self" or "ego", the best advice I've ever found comes from the Vipassana tradition. Connecting your every experience to the subtle emotional effects and anchoring to the breath will do wonders for your illusions about selves and the way people live!