Help me refine this mind tool

[Songtsan]

I have some questions if you have time: Can you tell me, without violating or using any of the ‘rules’ that are listed here, whether there is anything missing, that should be deleted, or whether one or more items are exactly the same thing (relatively, not absolutely as this is meant for relative mind states) and should be combined in a way that cannot be described using the parameters of the list or the mergence of all members? Or can you take action using words to in any way improve my understanding? I do realize that fullness = emptiness, but I made them separate because there is just a slight (although illusory) conceptual demarcation between them. I also realize that these are all the same essentially, but I am trying to stay a few steps before that yet right on the edge. I am trying to create a mind-map that could be used to explain things just a few steps before the purely non-direct mental realization that everything merges into ‘isness’. It’s an illustrative tool for all those people, like me, who still spend a lot of time fabricating mind constructs….If this model works, then I will design a model even one step closer that starts combining the categories in a sequence until it ends in the ‘one thing,’ but I want to have a logical pathway that could be conceptually explained (outside of direct perception methods) as purely a mental construct. I am working on a system that uses thought constructs to destroy thoughts constructs without insight/awareness methods. A system someone could use to destroy conceptual misunderstandings, so that they can then let the conceptions go because they have conceptually grasped all that they could (for those who cant help but contemplate conceptions like me). Thanks for your attention. - Songtsan

(See the sets below these questions and then come back to the questions if you would….)

 

1. If these were a pyramid, would you say that any of these numbers (not including the mergence of them all) belonged at the top, as in has the most strength or most relative AND absolute reality?

1. I am thinking that number 7 might be iffy and could possibly be removed…but it still seems right for now as doesn’t nonexistence exist, in that there are things that don’t exist, then doesnt that make it true that nonexistence exists and therefore it is a something, or would you say that nonexistence doesnt exist so therefore it doesnt belong on the list?

1. Are any of these sets illogical, lacking in substance, or should otherwise be removed because they don’t properly illustrate the principles I am aiming for?

1. Could you logically say that ‘suchness’ or ‘is-ness’ is an 8^th member of the list, or does it supersede and contain all of the members of the list or is it relatively the same as fullness or emptiness or both of those (I am thinking that this is the case, i.e. mergence of the list, but could it logically be argued that it could be relatively separated and make an 8^th member, conceptually separate from the others)? It seems possible that emptiness and fullness could be exactly suchness in relativistic terms, but it also seems that emptiness and fullness could be just one step away from suchness for categorization purposes.

1. As emptiness without the concept of ‘I’ seeing emptiness is the absolute emptiness, so in that case, although both are suchness, it seems that since suchness covers both emptiness with or without thought fabrications of a self seeing emptiness, then that means that since suchness encompasses both types of emptiness, it could be said that absolute emptiness does not include emptiness with a thought fabrication of ‘I’ experiencing emptiness, whereas suchness does, which would indicate suchness is ‘more advanced’ than either type of emptiness…or, would you say that suchness exactly equals the combination of fullness/emptiness in a Yin Yang kind of way, and that conceptions of absolute emptiness are always full as well and could never said to be absolutely empty?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Each one of these items can be applied to, and contains any of the others, and might something look like this (nonexistence not shown, because, well, it doesn’t exist…maybe imagine that it lies in the spaces instead of the points):

 

1) Everything is true

2) Everything is false

3) Everything is both true and false

4) Nothing is true and nothing is false

5) Emptiness (say/do nothing)

6) Fullness (say/do anything)

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Duality is true, nonduality is false

2) Nonduality is true, duality is false

3) Both duality and nonduality are true

4) Neither duality nor nonduality are true

5) Emptiness (say/do nothing)

6) Fullness (say/do anything)

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is good

2) Everything is bad

3) Everything is both good and bad

4) Nothing is good or bad

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is suffering

2) Everything is enjoyment

3) Both suffering and enjoyment are forever true

4) Neither suffering nor enjoyment is true

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) I am everything

2) I am nothing

3) I am both everything and nothing

4) I am neither everything nor nothing

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is everything

2) Everything is no-thing

3) Everything is both something and no-thing

4) Things are neither everything nor no-thing

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is self

2) Nothing is self

3) Everything and nothing is self at the same time

4) Neither everything, nor nothing is self

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) We are all the same

2) None of us are the same

3) We are both all the same and yet not the same

4) We are neither not the same nor the same

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is absolute

2) Everything is relative

3) Everything is both relative and absolute

4) Things are neither absolute or relative

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything exists

2) Nothing exists

3) Everything both exists and non-exists

4) Things don’t exist but they also don’t non-exist

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence (neither existence nor nonexistence exists)

 

1) Thumbs touch

2) Thumbs don’t touch

3) Thumbs both touch and don’t touch

4) Thumbs don’t touch but they also don’t not-touch

5) Emptiness

6) Fullness

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is empty

2) Nothing is empty

3) Everything both empty and not empty

4) Things are neither empty nor not-empty

5) Emptiness (without the concept of emptiness)

6) Fullness (…is emptiness, also with emptiness as concept)

7) Nonexistence

 

1) Everything is full

2) Nothing is full

3) Nothing is full and everything full

4) Nothing is full and nothing is not-full

5) Emptiness = fullness

6) Fullness = fullness

7) Nonexistence (?)

Edited June 11, 2013 by Songtsan

[zerostao]

i like the question does nonexistence exist?

construction is more challenging than deconstructing.

splitting apart yinyang for me would be problematic as i dont see that one could exist without the other.

it really isnt about other, yinyang exists itself,

from my perspective the truth is ever changing, it transforms from age to age.

truth is a process.

what may have been true, was true and it was necessary for it to have been true but transformed to a new truth.

it may be one of the reasons that the Tao that can be defined is not the true Tao.

my eyes havnt opened this morning lol, maybe i will drink some coffee and come back here

[Marblehead]

One cannot define nonexistence so one cannot talk about it. However, potential exists; but this is the Mystery, it hasn't yet taken form.

 

You will never escape dualities in this physical plane. Fruitless to try.

 

I agree with Zerostao in that Yin/Yang is not a duality. They are complimentary. I like to look at Chi (yin/yang) as if it were electricity. Yang is the positive terminal, yin is the negative terminal. Without both terminals connected there is no energy flow. And we (and all things of the universe) are the load that the energy is applied to.

 

I try to not speak of absolutes because as soon as I do I, or someone else, will find an exception to that absolute which, in fact, negates the absolute.

 

And yes, Buddhists like to speak of emptiness and I like to speak of fullness. But at root they are the same thing.

Edited June 10, 2013 by Marblehead

[Everything]

You will never escape dualities in this physical plane. Fruitless to try.

You are allways bound to oneness in this physical plane. There is no limit to the fruits of your effort.

[Marblehead]

While I agree it doesn't argue against what I said.

[manitou]

You're trying to do it all with logic. Please consider doing inner work so the intuitive part of you comes to the fore. The questions will align with answers that are already there, once you get yourself out of the way. Getting to the intuitive means that the answers don't have to follow logic or linear alignment. The puzzle will come together.

[Marblehead]

Personally. I can't talk about the intuitive part of me because it cannot, in my opinion, be spoken of with reason and logic. Intuition comes from the deeply hidden recesses of the unconscious mind. We don't even know how to consciously access this information that is in there. If we don't have our mind all cluttered with garbage that stuff comes to fore naturally whenever needed. In my opinion that is about as close to wu wei as one can get.

Edited June 10, 2013 by Marblehead

[Songtsan]

You're trying to do it all with logic. Please consider doing inner work so the intuitive part of you comes to the fore. The questions will align with answers that are already there, once you get yourself out of the way. Getting to the intuitive means that the answers don't have to follow logic or linear alignment. The puzzle will come together.

 

I'll try to respond to each post every one made, but I feel like answering this one first, because I knew that certain people would say this and I really want to explain my purpose in doing this in the first place. It is this:

 

The mind is like a reflection of the universe. A map of the real thing. So while it is part of the universe, it is also separate...kind of like a Russian nested doll. We only know the reflection from a dualistic standpoint. Everything else but mind is outside of our direct, unfiltered awareness - just a reflection. Most people live in their mind palaces or mind reflections. It is really difficult to meditate and attain samadhi or absorption. I have only attained briefly flashes from working really hard. I may eventually be able stay in that state, but I sinerely believe it is only a perception attainment at the same time, until full and permanent samadhi occrs - then you are an extension of absolute reality and there is no more 'I', just reality...pre-Nirvana realizations are definitely the most accurate reflection of the truth one can approach. One can shape their mind to most accurately approach true Tao or Nirvana or permanent absorption by using contemplation with thought - lots of evidence for this out there. The reason I am making this tool is to help better explain how the mind works and thus the universe to all those who will not meditate - who see no reason to do so, and yet still want to understand and have as accurate a reflection of reality as they can. I can tell you that there are more people like that then there are people who wish to meditate. So instead of just telling people - "you should meditate and find absorption," I am aiming to help them in the way they are willing to be helped. Saying that you should just meditate to someone who does not want to or feel like doing will simply fall on deaf ears. Give someone a tool that they WILL use and they will use it and and WILL helpful. Give someone a tool that they refuse to use and they will simply drop it on the ground and your energy was mostly wasted. I know that this is true for I have done it myself ten thousand times and seen others themselves do it ten thousand times. The funny thing is that those who speak of just dropping the mind and seeking unity often have just as inferior mind maps as anyone else...Their mental models of the universe are still incomplete truths. I have talked with supposedly enlightened people who have spoken twisted reflections of reality - people who meditated every day for years. So obviously those who meditate are not doing all that better than those who refine their thought constructs using logic and mental gnosis. If you look up jnana yoga, you will see that the way I am doing this has actually been around since at least Patanjali's day and age. It truly works. The proof is in thousands of years of evolution. You cannot say that people on average dont already have more exact mind maps of what reality is than they did thousands of years ago when they thought that the earth was flat and that the sun rotated around the earth.

 

I find that people who think that their way is the 'one way' are often responding from a force of habuit or reflex action which is based on believing that their way is the one most rightest way...If you look at the 7 point lists, you will clearly see why I think that there is no one right way...if there was, I think that that one right way would have had such obvious power that everyone would have already evolved to do it. The fact that most people operate on a dualistic level from the logical gnosis way might even indicate that the way I am doing is the best way for most people...note the stress on most....there can be no one best way...supposedly at least...I think all truths have truth, and all truths are false...Just see my 7 point list and you will see how I will likely respond to any statement you make to me...I will say: That is true, that is not true, that is both true and not true, that is neither true nor false, I will say nothing to you, or I will say anything...There are also things that I might have said which dont exist so they never could have happened. Still cant figure our if thats important or not.

 

Also there is this: In Taoism, there is no one right way to respond to any action...Tai chi states that the natural response will occur if we stay empty. If you are being attacked and you think of a way to respond, from some set of pre-fabricated actions in your head, the other person can get through your defenses easily. If you have a knee-jerk reaction to someone else's ways, by holding a fixed way in your head that responds to certain behaviors in a certain way every time, you are not being one with the Tao. Instead of aiming to shut someone else's attempt to improve themselves down, by saying essentialy, "Your way sucks, try my way," which just causes them to feel bad or get defensive, you should respond by using the best action for the moment - respond from emptiness. If you hold in your head the intention to help people where they are at, rather than holding in your head the way you would like them to be, you will contribute more enlightenment to everyone. As I said, if a person is not ready, the tool will be dropped....not only dropped, but the person won't even hold their hand out to accept the tool in the first place - it will bounce off their brain, make no mark whatsoever...especially if its something they have heard ten thousand times before (which I have heard what you said at least that many times)...you waste your energy on me. You must take each occasion as it arises and apply your energy where it is most effective. This is in accordance with the Tao. You will produce much more enlightenment in your life this way both in self and other. Learn to dance with all reality, not just within your own mind-map, which is mainly designed for your own self. I dont doubt your opinion has shown itself to be best for you, but it is not best for me at this time.

Edited June 10, 2013 by Songtsan

[thelerner]

The saying remind me that the opposite of a great truth is another great truth. Yet I also get a feeling that listing them the way you do makes them feel formulistic and a bit sterile. As if less were more.

[Songtsan]

The saying remind me that the opposite of a great truth is another great truth. Yet I also get a feeling that listing them the way you do makes them feel formulistic and a bit sterile. As if less were more.

 

I have a formulaic, scientific mind...I am aiming at those types of minds, not every type of mind out there - I like computers and science and formal logic methods....something for everyone out there...I also intend to refine the system and use multliple explanation styles, and more metaphors when I am finished with it. The approach is important, I agree, which is also why I am trying to get others to help me refine it - using groupthink to refine it basically. I appreciate your input and will definitely be integrating it into the final product. Thank you.

[Everything]

I have a

Could you please talk more about your avatar? It looks very curious to me. Who is the lady, why have you chosen her?

Edited June 10, 2013 by Everything

[thelerner]

I find putting decisions and philosophies through symbolic flow charts can create wonderfully useful models. I'm not sure how exactly how it'd be done, but I immediately 'see' a paper divided in half. The first half blank except for the word empty. The second begins with Everything and from there the decisions and choices flow down.

[Songtsan]

Could you please talk more about your avatar? It looks very curious to me. Who is the lady, why have you chosen her?

 

Its something from an anime series which I cant remember - I choose a female avatar as I am male, to remind myself to be feminine on the inside as well as masculine....I also sometimes also visualize myself as a Goddess or dakini. I actually visualize myself as everything and everyone as I believe you cannot achieve unity with the Tao unless you first become comfortable feeling like everything. As they say in the Tibetan book of the Dead, we are all the demons and gods, evil/good, left/right...etc. We are all dualities. We contain the world within us. We are all rapists, murderers, dictators, idiots, retarded, and also are all saints, saviors, geniuses, plumbers, children, elderly, and everything. As the mind is a minitiature reflection of ultimate reality, we are 'that' - each fractured thought construct within us represents an aspect of reality - a persona or avatar if you will. We have a mind construct for everything...they are aggregate mind constructs, meaning they are associatively connected with related memories. I spend extra time on unifying myself with anything that I unconsciously or subconsciously consider my opposite - because that is where ignorance and lines that separate is deepest - and these will not help me to unify myself....some of my opposites are females (as I am male), wealthy (as I am poor and suffer from envy - so I visualize myself as wealthy inside so that I can learn to love myself), popular and well liked (as I am a virtual unknown, am aloof and don't inspire trust in others to some extent), and so on - you get the point....oh yeah we are also all inanimate objects...chairs, tables, piles of refuse...anything you have ever been aware exists within your mind, and so you are 'that,' as we are all our mind. I am your mind, you are my mind. The Hong Sau mantra says, 'I am that,' or 'I am it,' There is a reverse technique - the 'Neti, Neti' mantra which states ,'I am not this' It actually works on the same principle, but in reverse - and is just as effective....I went with the other one and am firmly dedicated to it now...

Edited June 10, 2013 by Songtsan

[Songtsan]

I find putting decisions and philosophies through symbolic flow charts can create wonderfully useful models. I'm not sure how exactly how it'd be done, but I immediately 'see' a paper divided in half. The first half blank except for the word empty. The second begins with Everything and from there the decisions and choices flow down.

 

Interesting - I will contemplate this. I always saw the Yin Yang as such: black side is emptiness, with a seed of fullness, white side is fullness, containing the seed of emptiness. The seed of fullness is how all fullness springs from emptiness...and the seed of emptiness is how emptiness springs from fullness. The whole thing is of course, emptiness = fullness and fullness equals emptiness. If you spin the Yin Yang symbol at fast speeds, it all tends towards the 'one' and the defining barriers disappear. I view the spinning as the movement of time - motion and change - everything spinning in a maelstrom of energy/matter, everything changing places, melting together.

 

See spinning yin yang here...gets faster and faster towards the end...almost forming spiral with a point at center which I think represents the tendency of everything to approach godhead/unity/etc...see how in the end the Yin Yang disappears into whiteness - this represents unifying the cosmos and becoming all that is - you become fullness...white contains all colors thus its is fullness, black contains nothing, thus it is emptiness, and is waiting to be filled, even filled by the seed of fullness that exists within which is the primordial void:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFHZxwIN6AI

Edited June 10, 2013 by Songtsan

[Songtsan]

Also, I wanted to add this: mantras like Hong Sau are sort of like what I am doing...what they do is pair the concept of 'I am this, I am all this, and this too' with any thing that comes to awareness. It creates realization that all of the mind is one, instead of our fragmented dualistic view. What I dont like about mantras is that they can become stale and the words start to lack meaning...I am trying to create more of a way that uses an infinite supply of self-talk to realize exactly that - that 'I am that' - the mind has a way of defeating things that occur as patterns - there is a psychological term which I cant remember off the top of my head which basically explains that the more a mind is presented with something that it doesnt see as a threat, the more it tends to ignore that object so that it can concentrate on other things that may be more of a threat. This is why one-pointed meditations are so difficult for most people and require much intent and willful focus. We CAN maintain a strong and intentful focus using non-one-pointed techniques and this is definitely a part and parcel of the types of methods I am talking about...so the work is as structured and useful as any direct approaches...this is not a lazy man's way of doing things - its a non-focused mans way of doing things, which aims to teach focus by exhausting the mind, just as Zen koans do.

[Songtsan]

i like the question does nonexistence exist?

construction is more challenging than deconstructing.

splitting apart yinyang for me would be problematic as i dont see that one could exist without the other.

it really isnt about other, yinyang exists itself,

from my perspective the truth is ever changing, it transforms from age to age.

truth is a process.

what may have been true, was true and it was necessary for it to have been true but transformed to a new truth.

it may be one of the reasons that the Tao that can be defined is not the true Tao.

my eyes havnt opened this morning lol, maybe i will drink some coffee and come back here

 

I think if you split apart YinYang it would become a smaller YinYang, but whole.

 

I think ultimate reality is the truth, and the ultimate is forever changing, but forever the same.

[Songtsan]

One cannot define nonexistence so one cannot talk about it. However, potential exists; but this is the Mystery, it hasn't yet taken form.

 

You will never escape dualities in this physical plane. Fruitless to try.

 

I agree with Zerostao in that Yin/Yang is not a duality. They are complimentary. I like to look at Chi (yin/yang) as if it were electricity. Yang is the positive terminal, yin is the negative terminal. Without both terminals connected there is no energy flow. And we (and all things of the universe) are the load that the energy is applied to.

 

I try to not speak of absolutes because as soon as I do I, or someone else, will find an exception to that absolute which, in fact, negates the absolute.

 

And yes, Buddhists like to speak of emptiness and I like to speak of fullness. But at root they are the same thing.

 

The definition of the nonexistence isn't the nonexistence. For example, I can visualize a giant spinning cube that is larger than a galaxy 10 light years from here. It exists in my head, but does not exist in ultimate reality. Therefore it is nonexistent, yet it is also existent, because it exists exactly as I created it in my head. So it truly is nonexistent, yet it truly exists and then the 7 pointed list can be applied to describe its 'is-ness'

 

Escaping dualities - hmmm...where would we go? Nothing to escape. No place without, every place within.

 

YinYang is dual too though - there is the YinYang and then there is the observer of the YinYang - two things and thus duality...YinYang is a word and an idea, which takes a mind to perceive (duality: mind + idea)...it is also true eternally, as is everything. YinYang is also nonduality..'isness' 'suchness' 'that' 'it' 'one' 'all things' 'no-things'

 

What is duality but the splitting apart of things into smaller and smaller pieces? What is nonduality except the mergence of all small pieces into one thing? 'Everything that is contains everything' Is a car one thing? Or should you view it as an aggregate of parts.. Is each part in the car one thing, or should you view each part as composed of smaller parts? Where do all the parts end? atoms, quarks? quantum foam? If they had ever found the smallest part I think we would have heard about it by now. So parts break down endlessly into infinity. No end to parts. How can there be a whole? Should we say there is no whole? If there was a smallest part, then wouldnt duality cease to exist if that part was sent to its own universe? Would it be the only thing in existence there?

 

If you have some water, is it 'one water' or infinite parts of water, connected as a whole? Is it impossible then to have one glass of water. Should we call it a 'collection of aggregated parts' ? If the parts never ended, then what would that mean?

 

Somehow wholeness and parts must be the same thing...but I am still confused...

 

There are no absolute truths, except for the absolute truth that there are no absolute truths, which means that its not true that there are no absolute truths, so there really is at least one absolute truth out there - that absolute truths exist...so in that case, could there be more of them?

[Songtsan]

You are allways bound to oneness in this physical plane. There is no limit to the fruits of your effort.

 

If there is a 'you' and a oneness that are bound together, then doesn't that make them two things? Or in the act of binding, do we become one with the oneness? When we become one, will 'we' cease to exist? There cannot be a 'we' that is one, because that involves two things - the 'we' and the oneness, the 'we' that are one - suggestive of separate individuals in unity. If there is a physical plane, how can the oneness be in the plane? That would suggest that there is a something (oneness) that exists within something else (the physical plane). What is a limit but a boundary, and what is a boundary but a demarcation? If there is a boundary, then there is separation; if there is separation, then there are two (or more) objects here...this isn't oneness....true oneness cannot have boundaries...if there was something outside of it, it wouldnt be fully inclusive of all that exists - it would have to stretch further to encapsulate everything that was outside it. When it reaches the end, it comes back to the beginning. There is nothing outside of it....but wait! Is the no-thing a some-thing? Then we need to include that too! Every thing included means nothing excluded. Can anything ever be excluded? nope. One thing: 'the 'us' the 'this' the 'it' The 'I' the point....the origin.

[Songtsan]

While I agree it doesn't argue against what I said.

That's beautiful.

 

i like you.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Songtsan

[nine tailed fox]

this is called

 

Brain trying to understand mind

 

in the end it will be all Futile

Edited June 11, 2013 by nine tailed fox

[Songtsan]

Futile is as futile does. Mind = Mind. Brain = Brain. Life = Life. Also bliss exists in mind and brain...what's so futile about bliss?

 

I think futile sounds funny...

[Marblehead]

That's beautiful.

 

i like you.

I like you too.

[Marblehead]

Somehow wholeness and parts must be the same thing...but I am still confused...

I have said before and I will say again, the more we take a thing apart the further away from its true essence we get. Yes, there are the parts, but they are a part of the whole.

[Marblehead]

this is called

 

Brain trying to understand mind

 

in the end it will be all Futile

In a way I agree with you but not in totality. I don't believe it is a futile effort though.

[manitou]

I dont doubt your opinion has shown itself to be best for you, but it is not best for me at this time.

 

 

I only say what I say because it comes from my personal experience. I recognize my mind in your mind - your mind is incredible - you have the mind of a scientist or something close. I have the mind of a detective. It is very tricky to shut down minds like ours but it must be done, because we can't Think our way into the answers on this one. We're very clever about fooling ourselves and letting ego be the master of our thoughts.

 

If, at some point, the inner journey isn't taken, then the journey is only half finished. A person can start taking the inner journey, the self-cultivation, by merely reflecting on our own behavior day after day - how could I have been kinder today? Did I say something I should apologize for? What are my real motives for doing what I did? Follow the real motives to the bottom, the underlying selfishness. See it all for what it is, all the contortions, and the awareness of them will straighten them out. It is only after the clearance sale on the inside that we can truly see our part in everything that happens around us and a different type of clarity is achieved - a clarity that can't be won by thinking. It's a clarity arrived by placing one of the legs of the tripod within your cleared-out self, because your cleared-out self is the same self we all possess; only we let the dross accumulate on top of it and warp it.

 

I know I am being a pain in the arse here and nobody wants to hear it. But it is the only way down the emotional path to the One. The cerebral path alone won't get you there.

 

Best wishes

Edited June 11, 2013 by manitou