We all have issues-

[Aaron]

I have a problem with many religion's notion of enlightenment, especially when they tend to believe that enlightened people transcend the natural impulses of man. I have yet to find any proof that this is so, rather I find proof that it isn't, in particular historical evidence and news articles regarding religious authorities that have purportedly achieved enlightenment that end up doing things grossly immoral and un-compassionate in any context.

 

Okay, so I admit I'm assuming this, that there is the possibility that others can escape desires and wants, but if so, who are they and how did they prove this? My point of course is that because we are intrinsically tied to this world and body, there is no way of escaping the dual nature we live within, even if we are aware of the non-duality of existence.

 

I am well aware that the world is non-dual, not only intellectually, but also experientially. Many doubt this, that's okay, I don't need to prove it, but I did realize that for awhile I had doubts about these experiences because I failed to be free of desires and wants, of simple things like hunger. In fact I have major food issues still, which stem from growing up in poverty and not having enough food. How do I know I have these issues still? Well I had a friend reach out for my bowl of soup, wanting me to put it down and I bristled up and told him point blank, "don't touch my food." Even though I knew he didn't need or want it... it was the threat of losing the food that caused me to tense up.

 

So my point is that everyone has issues, regardless of their spiritual advancement and to fail to acknowledge this misleads people. The idea that we can escape all desire and suffering is not realistic, nor is there really any evidence to support that anyone has, so why do we continue to propagate it as a truth? Isn't it infinitely better to encourage people to work on their character defects, the ones that prevent them from experiencing quality in their life, without having to use misleading information to get them to do so?

 

Anyways, just some thoughts I was having. I'm sure some people will have ideas about this. Anyone want to take bets on who on the TTB chimes in with the absolute truth regarding this? I'm joking, that'd be a fools bet, we all know.

 

Aaron

Edited April 16, 2012 by Twinner

[dwai]

I have a problem with many religion's notion of enlightenment, especially when they tend to believe that enlightened people transcend the natural impulses of man. I have yet to find any proof that this is so, rather I find proof that it isn't, in particular historical evidence and news articles regarding religious authorities that have purportedly achieved enlightenment that end up doing things grossly immoral and un-compassionate in any context.

 

Okay, so I admit I'm assuming this, that there is the possibility that others can escape desires and wants, but if so, who are they and how did they prove this? My point of course is that because we are intrinsically tied to this world and body, there is no way of escaping the dual nature we live within, even if we are aware of the non-duality of existence.

 

I am well aware that the world is non-dual, not only intellectually, but also experientially. Many doubt this, that's okay, I don't need to prove it, but I did realize that for awhile I had doubts about these experiences because I failed to be free of desires and wants, of simple things like hunger. In fact I have major food issues still, which stem from growing up in poverty and not having enough food. How do I know I have these issues still? Well I had a friend reach out for my bowl of soup, wanting me to put it down and I bristled up and told him point blank, "don't touch my food." Even though I knew he didn't need or want it... it was the threat of losing the food that caused me to tense up.

 

So my point is that everyone has issues, regardless of their spiritual advancement and to fail to acknowledge this misleads people. The idea that we can escape all desire and suffering is not realistic, nor is there really any evidence to support that anyone has, so why do we continue to propagate it as a truth? Isn't it infinitely better to encourage people to work on their character defects, the ones that prevent them from experiencing quality in their life, without having to use misleading information to get them to do so?

 

Anyways, just some thoughts I was having. I'm sure some people will have ideas about this. Anyone want to take bets on who on the TTB chimes in with the absolute truth regarding this? I'm joking, that'd be a fools bet, we all know.

 

Aaron

 

well don't know about the absolute truth stuff...but these habits that are ingrained into us are called Samskaras in Yogic parlance -- they are like grooves on a record...patterns that have ingrained into us (each of us have some different pattern). The way to deal with it has been for me to first recognize the patterns. Some i have overcome while others I'm still trying to work through.

 

The way I was able to recognize these patterns is by slowing the mind down, generating the observer who can then look at every thought that is flying by in the mind...

 

The weird thing is, I don't see meditation as being a necessary step to be able to do this. Just learning to observe one's own mind....quiet time helps...but not necessary.

 

cheers

[Owledge]

The weird thing is, I don't see meditation as being a necessary step to be able to do this. Just learning to observe one's own mind....quiet time helps...but not necessary.

Yeah, I don't know whether people consider this advanced, but my observer is active a lot during normal daily activity. It's like part of my normal thought process. I guess it's called mindfulness if the observer is in sync with the current moment, which mine is not so much.

[Aaron]

My point is that no one can ever be free of desires or suffering, because they are intrinsic to this dual existence, with that in mind I am also asking why do religions tend to use this supposed escape as a selling point when they try to attract the masses?

 

Samsara is a different topic and one I don't talk about because I don't believe in it. For me it's the Buddhist's "heaven"... nice if it were true, but even better if people are desperate enough to fall for it and start worshiping your religion in the hopes of achieving it.

 

 

Aaron

Edited April 16, 2012 by Twinner

[C T]

My point is that no one can ever be free of desires or suffering, because they are intrinsic to this dual existence, with that in mind I am also asking why do religions tend to use this supposed escape as a selling point when they try to attract the masses?

 

Samsara is a different topic and one I don't talk about because I don't believe in it. For me it's the Buddhist's "heaven"... nice if it were true, but even better if people are desperate enough to fall for it and start worshiping your religion in the hopes of achieving it.

 

 

Aaron

Buddhism teaches that desires and suffering do not arise without cause.

 

It also teaches that through contemplative exercises, one can access the deeper recesses of intelligence, not so much to analyze and uncover the causes, but to cultivate patience and all the other necessary qualities so that one can begin creating a new set of causes leading to a new set of result, which when applied, would eventually disband and dissolve the older, unwanted habits and tendencies.

 

This is why i see Buddhist psychology as more effective than contemporary psychoanalytical methods.

[dwai]

My point is that no one can ever be free of desires or suffering, because they are intrinsic to this dual existence, with that in mind I am also asking why do religions tend to use this supposed escape as a selling point when they try to attract the masses?

 

Samsara is a different topic and one I don't talk about because I don't believe in it. For me it's the Buddhist's "heaven"... nice if it were true, but even better if people are desperate enough to fall for it and start worshiping your religion in the hopes of achieving it.

 

 

Aaron

 

Er...not sure I understand what you mean. Can you elaborate about how religions tend to use this supposed escape? Escape from what? Escape to where? How can one escape him/herself?

[tulku]

I have a problem with many religion's notion of enlightenment, especially when they tend to believe that enlightened people transcend the natural impulses of man. I have yet to find any proof that this is so, rather I find proof that it isn't, in particular historical evidence and news articles regarding religious authorities that have purportedly achieved enlightenment that end up doing things grossly immoral and un-compassionate in any context.

 

Okay, so I admit I'm assuming this, that there is the possibility that others can escape desires and wants, but if so, who are they and how did they prove this? My point of course is that because we are intrinsically tied to this world and body, there is no way of escaping the dual nature we live within, even if we are aware of the non-duality of existence.

 

I am well aware that the world is non-dual, not only intellectually, but also experientially. Many doubt this, that's okay, I don't need to prove it, but I did realize that for awhile I had doubts about these experiences because I failed to be free of desires and wants, of simple things like hunger. In fact I have major food issues still, which stem from growing up in poverty and not having enough food. How do I know I have these issues still? Well I had a friend reach out for my bowl of soup, wanting me to put it down and I bristled up and told him point blank, "don't touch my food." Even though I knew he didn't need or want it... it was the threat of losing the food that caused me to tense up.

 

So my point is that everyone has issues, regardless of their spiritual advancement and to fail to acknowledge this misleads people. The idea that we can escape all desire and suffering is not realistic, nor is there really any evidence to support that anyone has, so why do we continue to propagate it as a truth? Isn't it infinitely better to encourage people to work on their character defects, the ones that prevent them from experiencing quality in their life, without having to use misleading information to get them to do so?

 

Anyways, just some thoughts I was having. I'm sure some people will have ideas about this. Anyone want to take bets on who on the TTB chimes in with the absolute truth regarding this? I'm joking, that'd be a fools bet, we all know.

 

Aaron

 

So you think you are God now and gets to decide what is misleading or true?

 

You get to decide only a reality based on limitations is true and a reality based on in finiteness is false?

 

This is why I say humans do not have the wisdom to become multi-dimensional beings free of samsara.

 

Or are you trying to brainwash the foolish in here into denying the Kingdom of the Universe within every Human?

 

Every Human can be a God.

 

It is the Destiny of Humanity to Evolve into Gods and the only beings fearing this Evolution are those who had chained Humanity in this Prison Planet Reality for eons.

 

But not to worry, in a few years time, the current Slave Keepers will be the Slaves instead and the Hunted will become the Hunters.

 

The Slaves will become Gods and the so-called Gods controlling this Prison Planet will become Slaves instead.

 

This, I can promise you with my life.

Edited April 16, 2012 by tulku

[Mokona]

So you think you are God now and gets to decide what is misleading or true?

 

You get to decide only a reality based on limitations is true and a reality based on in finiteness is false?

 

This is why I say humans do not have the wisdom to become multi-dimensional beings free of samsara.

 

Or are you trying to brainwash the foolish in here into denying the Kingdom of the Universe within every Human?

 

Every Human can be a God.

 

It is the Destiny of Humanity to Evolve into Gods and the only beings fearing this Evolution are those who had chained Humanity in this Prison Planet Reality for eons.

 

But not to worry, in a few years time, the current Slave Keepers will be the Slaves instead and the Hunted will become the Hunters.

 

The Slaves will become Gods and the so-called Gods controlling this Prison Planet will become Slaves instead.

 

This, I can promise you with my life.

 

What?

[RiverSnake]

I think the personality is always flawed because it is something material. But we are not our personality even though we act through it. Just my opinion

 

-My 2 cents, Peace

[Owledge]

What?

... the fuck?!

[tulku]

What?

 

You can't hear the Judgement coming?

[Aetherous]

One school I belong to claims (in my own words and understanding) that by attempting to stop cultivating bad things, and trying to cultivate good things only, the dual being eventually becomes dominated by the good...so instead of the animal instincts and drives sometimes controlling the person, the soul and its intuition and intelligence lead the way. These tame "the beast" naturally. Without effort, once you reach that stage of cultivation. Then you have a spiritual human being, no longer conflicted internally...no longer of a dual nature.

 

But yeah, I agree that "we all have issues".

 

It also teaches that through contemplative exercises, one can access the deeper recesses of intelligence, not so much to analyze and uncover the causes, but to cultivate patience and all the other necessary qualities so that one can begin creating a new set of causes leading to a new set of result, which when applied, would eventually disband and dissolve the older, unwanted habits and tendencies.

 

This is in line with the above.

[thelerner]

You can't hear the Judgement coming?

Personally no. But I get your point that there quite likely there are some out there who have no issues and they're just not posting .. and in our general sphere of knowledge.

[C T]

Hi CT. To what exactly are you referring when you say "Buddhist psychology?"

Jack Kornfield explains over 12 ten-minute YT parts what Buddhist psychology is.

 

Please explore and form your own conclusion:

 

Part One:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVvBxffvzkk&feature=relmfu

[Simple_Jack]

I have a problem with many religion's notion of enlightenment, especially when they tend to believe that enlightened people transcend the natural impulses of man. I have yet to find any proof that this is so, rather I find proof that it isn't, in particular historical evidence and news articles regarding religious authorities that have purportedly achieved enlightenment that end up doing things grossly immoral and un-compassionate in any context.

 

Okay, so I admit I'm assuming this, that there is the possibility that others can escape desires and wants, but if so, who are they and how did they prove this? My point of course is that because we are intrinsically tied to this world and body, there is no way of escaping the dual nature we live within, even if we are aware of the non-duality of existence.

 

I am well aware that the world is non-dual, not only intellectually, but also experientially. Many doubt this, that's okay, I don't need to prove it, but I did realize that for awhile I had doubts about these experiences because I failed to be free of desires and wants, of simple things like hunger. In fact I have major food issues still, which stem from growing up in poverty and not having enough food. How do I know I have these issues still? Well I had a friend reach out for my bowl of soup, wanting me to put it down and I bristled up and told him point blank, "don't touch my food." Even though I knew he didn't need or want it... it was the threat of losing the food that caused me to tense up.

 

So my point is that everyone has issues, regardless of their spiritual advancement and to fail to acknowledge this misleads people. The idea that we can escape all desire and suffering is not realistic, nor is there really any evidence to support that anyone has, so why do we continue to propagate it as a truth? Isn't it infinitely better to encourage people to work on their character defects, the ones that prevent them from experiencing quality in their life, without having to use misleading information to get them to do so?

 

Anyways, just some thoughts I was having. I'm sure some people will have ideas about this. Anyone want to take bets on who on the TTB chimes in with the absolute truth regarding this? I'm joking, that'd be a fools bet, we all know.

 

Aaron

That's your problem. Instead of speculating about this: You should be focused on proving for yourself, whether it is possible to break the cycle of continually falling into your own habitual propensities, instincts and tendencies.

 

EDIT: Sentence structure.

Edited April 17, 2012 by Simple_Jack

[gendao]

Okay, so I admit I'm assuming this, that there is the possibility that others can escape desires and wants, but if so, who are they and how did they prove this? My point of course is that because we are intrinsically tied to this world and body, there is no way of escaping the dual nature we live within, even if we are aware of the non-duality of existence.

 

I am well aware that the world is non-dual, not only intellectually, but also experientially. Many doubt this, that's okay, I don't need to prove it, but I did realize that for awhile I had doubts about these experiences because I failed to be free of desires and wants, of simple things like hunger. In fact I have major food issues still, which stem from growing up in poverty and not having enough food. How do I know I have these issues still? Well I had a friend reach out for my bowl of soup, wanting me to put it down and I bristled up and told him point blank, "don't touch my food." Even though I knew he didn't need or want it... it was the threat of losing the food that caused me to tense up.

Non-duality is just past the beginning of Enlightenment, which appears to be a deepening process..

 

It appears like once non-duality is realized, emotions still arise - but they feel less associated with the individual and pass away much faster.

NDM: What about proclivities, tendencies, habits of behavior, conditioning and so on. Did these also fall away with the "sense of self" or do they still remain?

 

Nancy Dolin: Since mental clarity has gotten razor sharp, sensing dysfunctional situations around me has gotten more acute. For example, I can see why connections between people are not working well, and it's frustrating sometimes. Things like that have always frustrated me, and perhaps they do even more now that things are so clear. Sometimes anger is expressed about it which is both new and different. The difference is the anger comes from a purer place than it use to without the story of guilt attached.

 

Seeking continues. Sometimes it's very annoying when it does. Sometimes laughter arises about it, but the other day there were tears and frustration. Ultimately, it is no one seeking to be someone, a most futile venture. Seeking to be someone currently takes on the form of desperation for friendships, a life's purpose, financial well-being, making people in my life proud of me, and being noticed by those who are disinterested. Even participating in this interview is a form of seeking. Behind it is desperation to be someone at long last. This seeking is tiresome, but unavoidable so long as there is a seeker.

 

Disappearing happens still on occasion. Strangely, when it does, desperation to seek completely ceases. The necessity for any pursuits suddenly drops away.

 

NDM: So when you say that things that used to frustrate you, perhaps more now since you are crystal clear. What or who is being frustrated exactly?

 

Nancy Dolin: Dualistic terms like "I" are being used in this interview, because it is the clearest way to communicate to the readership. But it is seen that frustration is merely arising, and no one is frustrated. But sometimes that is forgotten when the individual is being identified with.

[Birch]

That was interesting Vortex.

I do think there's a distance between oneself and one's experience that is gained through practice. That whole 'you are not your experience' thing. The way I see this is that I want my experience to be a certain way and it isn't. I want things that I think will cause my experience to change into something that I can imagine as permanent and "better" or more pleasing. This includes the 'perfect' behaviour that will get me such things. But I'm also confused about causality. I've experienced sadness even in the most beautiful surroundings and many other flavours of experience that don't seem to be linked to anything in particular, I've seen "imperfect" behaviour rewarded time and again to a point where almost none of makes any 'causal' sense. I've also tried it "backwards", flooding my system with recalled 'good feeling' from memory, attempted 'positive thinking' despite whatever may be happening. I've watched my thoughts like a hunter until they've clammed up, but I know they're still sort there as I feel the tension, the list of things that I've done is pretty long:-)

 

It's tempting to attribute all of this to the fight for ego's existence. It's also tempting to say that it's all just an attempt to be happy:-) And at some point, I reckon I give up trying.

 

I should point out that 'giving up' would be a bloody relief:-)

[Aaron]

That's your problem. Instead of speculating about this: You should be focused on proving for yourself, whether it is possible to break the cycle of continually falling into your own habitual propensities, instincts and tendencies.

 

EDIT: Sentence structure.

 

It's not my problem at all. My problem is people telling others that emotions are flaws and somehow need to be removed and distanced from, as if emotions, in and of themselves are the cause of hardship. What is the perfect Buddhist world? A world where people don't think at all, where they don't feel anything but the right emotions?

 

I've experienced non-duality and on those occasions when I did experience it, I was struck by the lack of emotion present, how distant I felt, yet I didn't feel at peace, I felt absolutely nothing and I'm positive, for me, that it wasn't necessarily a better state of being. The non-duality that exists, the light, emptiness, whatever you want to call it, isn't intrinsically us either, because "we" do not exist there, there's nothing there at all, so in pursuing non-duality, what we give up is ourselves and for what?

 

I've put a great deal of thought into this and I've mentioned it several times with the same answers, "you don't understand the truth" or "you are too attached to the illusion that is you" or even better yet "you are a critical-thinking person who fails to grasp the reality of absolute light." It's all bullshit though, because what I am beginning to realize is that regardless of what I do, I always come back to the dual existence, in fact, non-duality is transient for "ME", not the other way around.

 

Yes I may die some day, but while I am alive I can not be in a non-dual state persistently and still be within the dual world that I exist in as "me". Even more so, we fail to realize that even within the greatness of the universe I am not really "me", but the totality of dual existence, but people gloss over that, when in fact it's probably the most important realization, because without it, I don't think you can ever experience the non-duality that exists underneath, unseen, or within everything, whichever way you want to think of it.

 

This is the reason monks suffer from the same issues everyone else does. Monks will march off to war, they'll support atrocities, commit atrocious acts on others, and rationalize it in the name of compassion. We cannot escape the duality of our existence, even if we can minimize the attachments we have to the world. We will always be attached to this world, the only way not to be is to cease existing as who we are, and that can only be done by dissolving the essence of us, which to the best of my knowledge and experience can only be done by dying.

 

So if we're trying to transcend this reality, then the only way any of us can achieve it is through killing ourselves, yet no one ever mentions this, because it's not really the answer everyone wants, rather they want to believe that the world can be a better place and they can end all the misery they feel and have happy thoughts or peaceful serene experiences, but none of that is real, because you can't have peace without chaos and you can't have happiness without sorrow. If you tell someone this, that they will have to give up happiness to escape misery, the only people that usually buy into this frame of thinking are the people suffering greatly, this is one of the reasons the poor tend to be the most religious.

 

I'm sure many people are going to say this is B.S. but I ask you this, PROVE to me that it isn't, without the age old line, "well you'll never know if you don't try it", because I've tried it and it doesn't work. Maybe I wasn't indoctrinated well enough, but I went to the other side and I came back realizing it's not the entire answer, there's something more and no one wants to accept that maybe that something more has to do with learning who we are in relation to our dual existence, understanding the connection we have to all things and respecting those things in turn. It's not as easy, because it means giving up the notion of self, not in the sense of erasing who we are, or escaping our responsibility to each other through detaching, but accepting our own responsibility for the way others are as well.

 

Aaron

Edited April 17, 2012 by Twinner

[Thunder_Gooch]

People who claim to have obtained non dual awareness, which may or may not be enlightenment, it could be some form of schizophrenia even, claim that nothing is better or worse than anything.

 

For them having sex with seventy two 18 year old virgins while stoned out of their gourd and winning the lottery would be no more appealing than being slowly ground into hamburger while alive.

 

Neither pleasure nor pain have any meaning, nor does anything else in anything more than the context of a dream.

 

According to them no person exists anymore to experience either pain nor pleasure.

 

If this is mental illness or enlightenment I can't say for sure.

 

It does seem these people no longer have any issues, as even a physical painful death is of no concern.

[Owledge]

[goldisheavy]

I have a problem with many religion's notion of enlightenment, especially when they tend to believe that enlightened people transcend the natural impulses of man. I have yet to find any proof that this is so, rather I find proof that it isn't, in particular historical evidence and news articles regarding religious authorities that have purportedly achieved enlightenment that end up doing things grossly immoral and un-compassionate in any context.

 

Well said, Aaron. I agree.

 

I think that people can transform themselves, but transformation is slow and gradual. There is no point at which the desires just cease. Instead, they change. Old desires fade. New ones take their place. This is a gradual and smooth process.

 

The problem is with the idea that enlightenment is like a light switch, once it's on, it's on. It's nothing like that. Instead all people have some wisdom. Some people have more wisdom and some less, but no one is 100% deluded and no one is 100% wise. We don't reach these extreme states. Even the dumbest person has some wisdom. And even the wisest person has some residual foolishness.

 

A lot of people imagine than enlightenment is like flipping a light switch. What was dark becomes illuminated. Bah. It's nothing like that. One experience can be like that. But after that experience passes, you realize not much has changed. Old habits die hard. Old beliefs still have plenty of force left. Old fears still seem menacing, even if they are reduced. What then? Well, then the person has to continue contemplating, meditating, and in short, simply continue living. You'll have more experiences. You'll have new insights. Maybe one day you'll think "I am now enlightened." Then 10 years later you might think, "Boy, 10 years ago I thought I was enlightened, lol... I am way wiser now than 10 years ago, so if I am ever enlightened, it's now or never." Then 10 years ago you might again think that you've advanced, and what seemed like a dizzying height at the time, now seems like a mole hill. And so on. And in some sense, you're always right. You're always enlightened because it's relative. If you are wiser this moment than previous, you've been enlightened. If you are more foolish, you're endarkened. And then enlightened again. It's not a big deal.

Edited April 17, 2012 by goldisheavy

[Sunya]

My point is that no one can ever be free of desires or suffering, because they are intrinsic to this dual existence, with that in mind I am also asking why do religions tend to use this supposed escape as a selling point when they try to attract the masses?

 

It's all in the mind. We create our reality. The only difference between a dual and nondual existence is a change in perception. There is nothing intrinsic about anything. This is a self limiting belief.

 

Samsara is a different topic and one I don't talk about because I don't believe in it. For me it's the Buddhist's "heaven"... nice if it were true, but even better if people are desperate enough to fall for it and start worshiping your religion in the hopes of achieving it.

 

Not sure what you mean here... Samsara means the world of conditioned existence, suffering, attachment, never being satisfied, etc. Nirvana is the freedom from that. I think you got those terms confused. Anyway, the nondual truth is that Nirvana is Samsara... It's not a separate place or heaven or anything.

 

It's not my problem at all. My problem is people telling others that emotions are flaws and somehow need to be removed and distanced from, as if emotions, in and of themselves are the cause of hardship. What is the perfect Buddhist world? A world where people don't think at all, where they don't feel anything but the right emotions?

 

Nobody is saying that emotions are bad. Emotions are fine. It's identification with emotions that's the problem.

 

The perfect Buddhist world is where everyone recognizes their true nature, which is primordial and spacious freedom, and to act from that truth instead of from the miconception inherent in a dualistic mindset.

 

I've experienced non-duality and on those occasions when I did experience it, I was struck by the lack of emotion present, how distant I felt, yet I didn't feel at peace,

 

It's all bullshit though, because what I am beginning to realize is that regardless of what I do, I always come back to the dual existence, in fact, non-duality is transient for "ME", not the other way around.

 

You are assuming that what you experienced was actually the enlightened state, and from that misconception you are judging the contemplative traditions. You did not experience your natural state. It is not a state of nothingness. This experience is what Tibetan Buddhists called a state of no-thought, but it is actually very blissful and peaceful once you let go and stop clinging to who you think you are. The next step is to integrate that state with energy (emotions, thoughts, the body, the world). I am sorry, but you are not enlightened. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can move on.

 

I'm sure many people are going to say this is B.S. but I ask you this, PROVE to me that it isn't

 

Nobody has to prove anything to you. We each have our own paths. You seem to be stuck and are obviously frustrated. I can understand that. Ultimately you have to prove to yourself what is true and what isn't.

[goldisheavy]

People who claim to have obtained non dual awareness, which may or may not be enlightenment, it could be some form of schizophrenia even, claim that nothing is better or worse than anything.

 

For them having sex with seventy two 18 year old virgins while stoned out of their gourd and winning the lottery would be no more appealing than being slowly ground into hamburger while alive.

 

Neither pleasure nor pain have any meaning, nor does anything else in anything more than the context of a dream.

 

According to them no person exists anymore to experience either pain nor pleasure.

 

If this is mental illness or enlightenment I can't say for sure.

 

It does seem these people no longer have any issues, as even a physical painful death is of no concern.

 

There is something like this, but I think you exaggerate this effect. Enlightened people still eat if they have a chance. They don't decline food because starving is perfectly identical to eating. And if the woman is pretty and intelligent, her company is enjoyable to most men, even to enlightened ones. If the woman is dumb, then an enlightened person is more likely to avoid her even if she's pretty. Basically enlightened people are relatively less superficial, but not necessarily infinitely so. Like Aaron said in another post, they can have plenty of their own issues.

 

If you want to have no issues, you have to give up your dreams. That's not necessarily the place to be. It may be a good place for some people for some time. But is it for you? Is it for everyone? I don't think so.

 

If you look at how enlightened people have been portrayed by tradition, they do have all kinds of dreams and goals. For example Buddha wanted to enlighten others. Lao Tzu wanted to travel. If Lao Tzu didn't want to travel, why did he leave, right? He could have stayed. He was welcome and respected. If you read other stories about sages, they all had dreams of some sort. Some of them practiced to gain supernormal powers. Others wanted to pass the wisdom to future generations. Others lamented their misfortune (described in Zhuangzi, for example). There were all kinds. It's actually a good idea to read as many such tales as you can to get an idea of just how broad the possibilities are. Get a sense of how diverse the characters can be. Some are calm and peaceful. Others are angry. Some follow convention, others go around trashing every taboo, etc. All these people are individuals. I bet some of them even had pimples rather than auras.

 

If you want a get a good collection of stories, one book I can suggest is "The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals & History". Please don't interpret this as me promoting Tibetan Buddhism. I don't want anyone to become a Buddhist, but reading some of those accounts about various sages can really be illuminating for anyone.

 

Because almost all beings who are considered enlightened have goals, dreams, things to strive for, vows, they all have issues. They all have feelings, they have ups and downs, pleasure and pain and so on. They might not be buffeted by those as harshly as others and they can have a better, more flexible perspective, but they aren't complete foreigners to us. They are somewhat like us, and like you specifically. You are somewhat like all the enlightened people.

Edited April 17, 2012 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

That was interesting Vortex.

I do think there's a distance between oneself and one's experience that is gained through practice. That whole 'you are not your experience' thing.

 

I agree. It's not the distance that people talk about when they say this. It's that usually experiences are suggestive. If we then follow these suggestions and take them at face value, we tend to lock ourselves in and limit our horizons. So for example, if I am a man, a human, goldisheavy, a specific individual, if I have a body, and if bodies have physical properties, and if my intent expresses through the agency of the body, then what is it I am capable of? By having all these beliefs I just limited myself. So how can we go beyond the limitations? One technique is to suggest that you are not anything you experience. This isn't to put a distance between you and your experience. It's to break the suggestive power of appearances over your mind. Your body suggests itself as something small and physical, but if you aren't it, then you are neither small nor physical. This can broaden your horizons. But all experiences are intimate. There is no distance.

[Aaron]

It's all in the mind. We create our reality. The only difference between a dual and nondual existence is a change in perception. There is nothing intrinsic about anything. This is a self limiting belief.

 

 

Not sure what you mean here... Samsara means the world of conditioned existence, suffering, attachment, never being satisfied, etc. Nirvana is the freedom from that. I think you got those terms confused. Anyway, the nondual truth is that Nirvana is Samsara... It's not a separate place or heaven or anything.

 

 

 

Nobody is saying that emotions are bad. Emotions are fine. It's identification with emotions that's the problem.

 

The perfect Buddhist world is where everyone recognizes their true nature, which is primordial and spacious freedom, and to act from that truth instead of from the miconception inherent in a dualistic mindset.

 

 

 

 

 

You are assuming that what you experienced was actually the enlightened state, and from that misconception you are judging the contemplative traditions. You did not experience your natural state. It is not a state of nothingness. This experience is what Tibetan Buddhists called a state of no-thought, but it is actually very blissful and peaceful once you let go and stop clinging to who you think you are. The next step is to integrate that state with energy (emotions, thoughts, the body, the world). I am sorry, but you are not enlightened. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can move on.

 

 

 

Nobody has to prove anything to you. We each have our own paths. You seem to be stuck and are obviously frustrated. I can understand that. Ultimately you have to prove to yourself what is true and what isn't.

 

I'm glad you didn't have to prove anything, because this is the same old rhetoric I hear every time I bring up this topic. "Oh, the reason you didn't experience x y and z is because it wasn't an enlightened experience, when you have one, you'll understand then." I call BS on that. It's a cop-out a way to argue against those who don't decide to define reality according to your paradigm.

 

I'm not really dissing you Sunya, I know you're a nice person, but I hear this so much it's like a broken record. In fact it's been said twice so far in this thread alone. It's like it's ingrained in the Buddhist mind "Oh... if I don't feel this, it's because I really didn't have this, when I do, I will experience it!" It gets really annoying and to me, isn't any different than telling someone to worship God, just because there might be one, or to tell a doubter, "well maybe there isn't a heaven, but do you really want to take that chance?" YES! Absolutely yes! I'm not going to follow dogma without any evidence that it's REAL! That's the problem, no Buddhist can prove any of this, they can only say, "well if you want to see, you'll have to practice." Yeah, I'm going to waste ten years of my life, if not more, practicing to find out that none of it's real. Keep in mind that during those ten years I'll be taught how to think and by then I may actually believe that what I'm feeling is real, when in fact it's just preprogrammed dogma.

 

Show me the facts and the proof and I'll be a happy little whateveryouwantmetobe kind of guy.

 

Aaron

Edited April 17, 2012 by Twinner