Suffering and Samsara question.

[Informer]

Do you think one can be without suffering yet be with samsara? Instead of breaking it, only see it and utilize it?

[xabir2005]

An arhat achieves nirvana with remainder while alive: freed from mental suffering, ignorance, afflictions, craving, anger, fear, sorrow, attachments, and so on. Yet his senses are fully functional.

 

The arhat after physical passing is "nirvana without remainder", nirvana means cessation, means ceased without remainder. While nirvana with remainder means, well, cessation of afflictions with remainder of body-mind.

 

Especially for Mahayana the goal is not just personal salvation but to be liberated and yet stay in this world to save sentient beings out of compassion.

 

The problem does not lie in senses, mind or body but in ignorance and attachments. If you are liberated, you attain nirvana even in the midst of life.

[Informer]

The question is in regards to samsara, I don't see that you answered it? Nirvana is breaking Samsara right?

[konchog uma]

in my own understanding, which others are more than welcome to disagree with, samsara doesn't break, or stop, or get negated by nirvana. Cyclical existance continues, but the attachments and aversions to things break, and stop.

 

Taking things as having some kind of non-transitory reality stops, and so a being is liberated from the bonds of samsara, but samsara itself continues. So in that sense, someone can live "in samsara" and use it at every opportunity as a way to practice, or help other beings, etc. They don't have to live in some non-dual blissed out nirvanic state that is somehow seperate from cyclical existance, because everything moves in cycles, so how could you really do that??

 

In my view, the main difference is whether or not a person is attached to the phenomena that pass cyclically. If they are clinging, they will suffer. If they are just watching the passing parade, that can be quite enjoyable at times, and a person can see and utilize whatever they want.

Edited February 8, 2012 by anamatva

[Informer]

in my own understanding, which others are more than welcome to disagree with, samsara doesn't break, or stop, or get negated by nirvana. Cyclical existance continues, but the attachments and aversions to things break, and stop.

 

Taking things as having some kind of non-transitory reality stops, and so a being is liberated from the bonds of samsara, but samsara itself continues. So in that sense, someone can live "in samsara" and use it at every opportunity as a way to practice, or help other beings, etc. They don't have to live in some non-dual blissed out nirvanic state that is somehow seperate from cyclical existance, because everything moves in cycles, so how could you really do that??

 

In my view, the main difference is whether or not a person is attached to the phenomena that pass cyclically. If they are clinging, they will suffer. If they are just watching the passing parade, that can be quite enjoyable at times, and a person can see and utilize whatever they want.

 

Thank you anamatva!

 

So Nirvana is achieving freedom from samsara and samsara can still be utilized. There is just no samsara in control of you? (well, there never really was, but it is realized)

 

That would make a lot of sense.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[konchog uma]

Thank you anamatva!

 

So Nirvana is achieving freedom from samsara and samsara can still be utilized. There is just no samsara in control of you? (well, there never really was, but it is realized)

 

That would make a lot of sense.

 

That is how i have learned it. There are a lot of schools of buddhism and a lot of opinions about philosophical matters like this though.

 

i think it was nagarjuna who said "nirvana is samsara and samsara is nirvana", and some people take it to mean what i explained up there, and some people take it to mean that both are inherently empty, so in that way they are the same. There are probably other interpretations, since buddhists love to write those ... I guess i personally take it to mean both, but I have been taught a view of emptiness that doesn't mean "non-existant", it has more to do with the transitory nature of things and the dependently originated nature... so its not easy to understand or explain. But thats buddhism for you..

[Informer]

What If i tried to correlate "nirvana" to understanding yin? Or Nirvana to a Macro Cosmic Orbit?

 

I think they are almost interchangeable, yet not within the same perspective.

 

Realizing samsara is realizing nirvana, right?

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[konchog uma]

What If i tried to correlate "nirvana" to understanding yin? Or Nirvana to a Macro Cosmic Orbit?

 

I think they are almost interchangeable, yet not within the same perspective.

 

Realizing samsara is realizing nirvana, right?

 

nirvana is a state of liberation, roughly speaking. Attachments, aversions, ignorance in all its forms, anger, etc, all these things are things that the mind and energies of people entrain to until they can let go of them, and the impulse within to fixate on them. Thats the 2 second definition. So nirvana is sort of yin to samsara's yang in that the mind of samsara is moving and active, always clinging and being dragged so to speak, while nirvana is still, not being affected. So i think in that way you can say nirvana is the yin of the two..

 

And while the MCO can remove obstructions of the energy that manifest mentally as attachments, i don't think it is the same.. MCO is a practice and nirvana is like a state of being so there isn't, in my mind, a direct correlation, even tho the MCO can be used as a technique to attain freedom over time.

 

Realizing samsara is not necessarily realizing nirvana. To realize nirvana one must be free of conditioned mind and energies, and have let go of all the aforementioned poisons. So there is a little bit of difference between just realizing samsara, that things go round and round and we shouldn't attach etc, and actually realizing nirvana.

[Informer]

nirvana is a state of liberation, roughly speaking. Attachments, aversions, ignorance in all its forms, anger, etc, all these things are things that the mind and energies of people entrain to until they can let go of them, and the impulse within to fixate on them. Thats the 2 second definition. So nirvana is sort of yin to samsara's yang in that the mind of samsara is moving and active, always clinging and being dragged so to speak, while nirvana is still, not being affected. So i think in that way you can say nirvana is the yin of the two..

 

And while the MCO can remove obstructions of the energy that manifest mentally as attachments, i don't think it is the same.. MCO is a practice and nirvana is like a state of being so there isn't, in my mind, a direct correlation, even tho the MCO can be used as a technique to attain freedom over time.

 

Realizing samsara is not necessarily realizing nirvana. To realize nirvana one must be free of conditioned mind and energies, and have let go of all the aforementioned poisons. So there is a little bit of difference between just realizing samsara, that things go round and round and we shouldn't attach etc, and actually realizing nirvana.

 

Macro cosmic orbit is pretty similar, microcosmic is only within.

 

Generally when people write MCO they are talking of microcosmic orbit.

 

I would think that to see samsara and know samsara, nirvana would also have to be seen and known, or a better word would be "grok". I have equated realization to grok. Which you understand the extent of realization in comparison to knowing, I'm sure.

 

Realizing Nirvana would bring realization of samsara tho, right?

 

I think this quote that V posted might aid to the correlation of Macro CO and Nirvana.

 

"Know the state of pure and total presence to be a vast expanse without center or border." Longchenpa

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[konchog uma]

Macro cosmic orbit is pretty similar, microcosmic is only within.

 

Generally when people write MCO they are talking of microcosmic orbit.

 

I would think that to see samsara and know samsara, nirvana would also have to be seen and known, or a better word would be "grok". I have equated realization to grok. Which you understand the extent of realization in comparison to knowing, I'm sure.

 

Realizing Nirvana would bring realization of samsara tho, right?

 

I think this quote that V posted might aid to the correlation of Macro CO and Nirvana.

 

"Know the state of pure and total presence to be a vast expanse without center or border." Longchenpa

 

yeah i was talking about macro CO just abbreviated it to MCO.

 

i guess if you sat in nirvanic state and thought about life for a while you would be likely to realize samsara, and since most buddhist realization is based on studying buddhist teachings, one would be even more likely to think in those terms. So i think, roughly, that you're probably right about nirvana bringing realization of samsara, yes.

 

and the MacroCO and nirvana are definitely related, in that MCO is designed to enable freedom of mind, energy, and body, and nirvana is a word which can be used for that state of freedom. I think you're right that they are related.. i was only trying to elucidate the nature of the relationship as i perceived it.

 

some people think macrocosmic orbit is the orbit which includes the thrusting and belt vessels, and goes also down the outside of the arms and legs and up the insides.. i learned all that as just microcosmic, so im glad you say that as long as its inside its micro.. thats in accord with how i learned it. Im sure there are different ways to talk about it, but i find it mildly annoying when there is different lexicon for the same things because thats confusing. I learned macro as bringing up earth energies through the bubbling well up to the dantian, and heavenly energies down from the bahui point at the top of the head, to nourish and support the bodies human energies. Then you let them meet in the dantian and balance, and just kind of respirate with heaven and earth, breathing out stagnant energy and breathing in fresh.. so i write all that because i am curious, is that your understanding of it? Just curious, don't mean to sidetrack the thread.

Edited February 8, 2012 by anamatva

[Informer]

yeah i was talking about macro CO just abbreviated it to MCO.

 

i guess if you sat in nirvanic state and thought about life for a while you would be likely to realize samsara, and since most buddhist realization is based on studying buddhist teachings, one would be even more likely to think in those terms. So i think, roughly, that you're probably right about nirvana bringing realization of samsara, yes.

 

and the MacroCO and nirvana are definitely related, in that MCO is designed to enable freedom of mind, energy, and body, and nirvana is a word which can be used for that state of freedom. I think you're right that they are related.. i was only trying to elucidate the nature of the relationship as i perceived it.

 

some people think macrocosmic orbit is the orbit which includes the thrusting and belt vessels, and goes also down the outside of the arms and legs and up the insides.. i learned all that as just microcosmic, so im glad you say that as long as its inside its micro.. thats in accord with how i learned it. Im sure there are different ways to talk about it, but i find it mildly annoying when there is different lexicon for the same things because thats confusing. I learned macro as bringing up earth energies through the bubbling well up to the dantian, and heavenly energies down from the bahui point at the top of the head, to nourish and support the bodies human energies. Then you let them meet in the dantian and balance, and just kind of respirate with heaven and earth, breathing out stagnant energy and breathing in fresh.. so i write all that because i am curious, is that your understanding of it? Just curious, don't mean to sidetrack the thread.

 

By all mean, please go in which ever direction you would like. I am learning a lot from every word you type.

 

I probably even have macro cosmic orbit confused from that angle. I was seeing it as the spiritual expansion coming from the combination of yin and yang. It is like that which is within expands beyond the boarders that once were. To expand forever only to return, as if it encircled forever and made its way back.

 

Kind of like realizing metta, but not with love, with awareness expanding in that manner.

[Informer]

I have really practiced activating yin through the feet, it is just sort of absorbed, I dunno how to explain it.

 

What you are talking about sounds to me like part of microcosmic orbit, where you kindle the fire in the solar plexus to move into the dan tien and create the vapor.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[Informer]

What I'm referring as MacroCO happens by the crown/pineal, relatively.

[konchog uma]

By all mean, please go in which ever direction you would like. I am learning a lot from every word you type.

 

I probably even have macro cosmic orbit confused from that angle. I was seeing it as the spiritual expansion coming from the combination of yin and yang. It is like that which is within expands beyond the boarders that once were. To expand forever only to return, as if it encircled forever and made its way back.

 

Kind of like realizing metta, but not with love, with awareness expanding in that manner.

 

oh okay.. see its so confusing, everyone means something different when they talk about macrocosmic orbit

 

i learned it as an extension of microcosmic orbit, so it incorporates all that, and then expands it to include the earth energies first, and then heavenly ones, much like the field longchempa mentions. yeah the heavenly breaths expand and don't return in a linear way, for me its like the cosmos truly has no center or edges, and every point is the center of an infinite expanse of space which just, if you keep going in any given direction, comes right back to where you are, so its like a hyperspatial physics mindwarp .. Contemplating the vastness of space is a way of expaning awareness, and one of the most powerful experiences of my life was feeling the metta of the universe, so i personally totally associate the two..

[konchog uma]

I have really practiced activating yin through the feet, it is just sort of absorbed, I dunno how to explain it.

 

What you are talking about sounds to me like part of microcosmic orbit, where you kindle the fire in the solar plexus to move into the dan tien and create the vapor.

 

oh i never kindled a fire or created a vapor to do microcosmic orbit... sounds like neidan

 

i just circulated the energies but using intention and visualiation, til i read Damo Mitchell's Daoist Neikung and started just turning the dantian to do it

[Informer]

oh i never kindled a fire or created a vapor to do microcosmic orbit... sounds like neidan

 

i just circulated the energies but using intention and visualiation, til i read Damo Mitchell's Daoist Neikung and started just turning the dantian to do it

 

It's not only Nei Dan (imo), you got the book Taoist Alchemy and Immortality?

 

Don't take what I say about MacroCO too srs, most of what I think to know has been from inference, correlations, and intuition. I am trying to sort thing out and you are being very helpful. Thank you!

 

[konchog uma]

It's not only Nei Dan (imo), you got the book Taoist Alchemy and Immortality?

 

Don't take what I say about MacroCO too srs, most of what I think to know has been from inference, correlations, and intuition. I am trying to sort thing out and you are being very helpful. Thank you!

 

 

sure bro, glad to help

 

i don't practice out of TAaI, i am one of those people who, on my grumpy days, feels that that book should never have been published. On my normal days, i just feel that one can't possibly learn immortality techniques from a book. I'm sure some of it is interesting, but on the recommendation of one of my teachers, i don't do any of those meditations.. i have read it tho, but its been a while

[konchog uma]

didn't get a chance to watch it but i thought i'd link it

[Informer]

All the work has to be done by you, it doesn't matter if there is a teacher to guide you or a book, (imo) books are written by teachers, so go figure

 

A pointing finger is a pointing finger, just don't study the finger.

[Apech]

Addressing OP on samsara and suffering.

 

Samsara is a view of reality engendered by a mind which is grasping at things as possible cures for its own unhappiness. As in if I only had such and such I would be happy ... The grasping mind either achieves the desired object and realises that it does not give happiness or fails to and becomes frustrated/angry. This drives further grasping which repeats the cycle. All this is based on ignorance. In other words on not being aware of the true nature of the mind.

 

Suffering is a component of samsara because the confused/ignorant min which drives it suffers from three types of dhukka ... that is pain itself, the loss arising from everything being temporary and basic conditioning. Suffering is inherent in samsara.

 

But of course ... samsara is itself a false or distorted idea of what is going on. So the suffering is unnecessary ... essentially by dropping desire/wanting the cycle is ended.

 

That's how I understand it.

[Informer]

Thank you for sharing apech!

[XieJia]

samsara is looking in a mirror

 

remembering he used to be young and strong and now he is not.

 

 

"why am I not the person I used to be?" he asked

 

phurr!!

 

nirvana stares right back at him

 

"Is there such a person? the face is ever-changing"