Merging with the Void

[Wayfarer64]

I have thus far avoided the void and feel no less for the lack of void in my life. To void may be to deficate, or to emit some error or to negate some behavior...But I have not found my emptyness to be a void. When my mind is "blanked" and I reach a state of "no- thought" I am filled with a deep sense of fullness and a completness, a satisfaction that holds my consciousness at peace.

If there is some great cosmic void in which my consciousness will find some long lasting peace I do not want to find it. I want to be able to come and go from that peacefull state, not remain there in an eternity of quietude... that sort of "completeness" has no appeal for me. I would rather exist in a more active role... able to be in a higher plane of consciousness, manifesting joys and wonders for life to spring from...not a pacified emptyness to waft through as an entity in eternity...

But of these things I can only speculate, and hope my direction as a spirit having this incarnation will lead me to an ability for manifestations of light and growth of spirit in whatever comes to be my destiny...

[三江源]

...But I have not found my emptyness to be a void. When my mind is "blanked" and I reach a state of "no- thought" I am filled with a deep sense of fullness and a completness, a satisfaction that holds my consciousness at peace.

 

 

 

I would agree with this completely. Is this what you mean when you say 'the void', Freeform? I dont think I have a word for it actually, or I just call it 'good meditation'...

[Todd]

If one doesn't know where the void is, how will one merge with it...?

Can anyone point to its direction?

 

peace,

Aiwei

 

[fatherpaul]

what is all this talk of the void?

there is nothing there to speak of.

[林愛偉]

what is all this talk of the void?

there is nothing there to speak of.

 

 

 

This is why merging is just delluded thinking.

[zenbrook]

what is all this talk of the void?

there is nothing there to speak of.

Nonetheless, we must still try.

 

freeform's original enquiry appears to arise in relation to the path:

Is it a worthy aim to merge with the void?...

whereas many of our responses seem instead to arise from the perspective of the fruit.

 

Now quite apart from the unlikeliness of this occurring, for 'those who know do not talk' it does seem sometimes as though we forget the wood for the trees (cue cryptic 'no wood, no trees; still the leaves rustle') and offer up koans where teisho may be more appropriate. More of cat's 'gnomics', I guess....

This is why merging is just delluded thinking.

Yes.... and no. Sure it is deluded, but what help is there in that? freeform's question makes perfect sense in light of duality - and that, may I be so bold, is where most of us live. In which case 'merging with the void' becomes just another skillful means that can be applied.

 

Sorry y'all.... I'm off work with a recurring eye infection and feeling fractious. I'm not having a go here, just questioning the validity of my own responses Likewise, freeform, if I'm attempting to put thoughts in your head (or to teach my grandmother how to suck eggs!) forgive me.

 

Oh, and my point? Buddha may well have held up a flower, but it didn't stop him opening his mouth at every opportunity. Sometimes being helpful is more important than being savvy.

 

Here endeth the sermon

Peace,

ZenB

[林愛偉]

Nonetheless, we must still try.

 

freeform's original enquiry appears to arise in relation to the path:

 

whereas many of our responses seem instead to arise from the perspective of the fruit.

 

Now quite apart from the unlikeliness of this occurring, for 'those who know do not talk' it does seem sometimes as though we forget the wood for the trees (cue cryptic 'no wood, no trees; still the leaves rustle') and offer up koans where teisho may be more appropriate. More of cat's 'gnomics', I guess....

 

Yes.... and no. Sure it is deluded, but what help is there in that? freeform's question makes perfect sense in light of duality - and that, may I be so bold, is where most of us live. In which case 'merging with the void' becomes just another skillful means that can be applied.

 

Sorry y'all.... I'm off work with a recurring eye infection and feeling fractious. I'm not having a go here, just questioning the validity of my own responses Likewise, freeform, if I'm attempting to put thoughts in your head (or to teach my grandmother how to suck eggs!) forgive me.

 

Oh, and my point? Buddha may well have held up a flower, but it didn't stop him opening his mouth at every opportunity. Sometimes being helpful is more important than being savvy.

 

Here endeth the sermon

Peace,

ZenB

 

Very nice.

 

For those who have ears that need teachings, there are teachings spoken for them. For those who need a void to merge with , there will be a void for them and techniques to merge. All until the techniques are no longer needed.

 

When I say deluded thinking.. it is just that adding more to the idea of separation causes the outcomes of separation to further manifest. Just cut it off! the attachments

 

Peace,

Aiwei

Edited July 25, 2007 by 林愛偉

[zenbrook]

Very nice.

 

For those who have ears that need teachings, there are teachings spoken for them. For those who need a void to merge with , there will be a void for them and techniques to merge. All until the techniques are no longer needed.

 

When I say deluded thinking.. it is just that adding more to the idea of separation causes the outcomes of separation to further manifest. Just cut it off! the attachments

 

Peace,

Aiwei

[freeform]

I've been quiet on this topic because it's really interesting to see people's reactions and oppinions, and I find it really hard to express myself with this.

 

Aiwei, ok - deluded thinking - I'm sorry that we live in dual world with dual words, it's just as deluded to judge something as deluded as it is to think of a void... I'm perfectly aware that the map is not the territory...

 

It all comes down to the difference I see in what Aiwei and Father Paul present and what some of my favourite teachers and many of the bums present (Cat comes to mind).

 

I know you can take my language appart and point out the duality and dillusion in my statements, but for just a minute set aside your understanding of spirituality and your point of view.

 

Aiwei and Paul constantly point to the infinite - separation is deluded, thinking of a void is deluded, fear is deluded etc etc - always the infinite always the singular. Aiwei mentioning that the ups and downs of earthly life must be transcended, since it's all illusion anyway etc.

 

This is in sharp contrast with what my favourite teacher has to say, and what I believe Taoism actually points to aswell. The earthly life of ups and downs and duality and emotion and personal 'stuff' and ego and separation is very much real - as real (and more apparent) than the infinite, heavenly singular emptiness (what I call the void here).

 

Near the beginning of this thread ThirstyTraveler pointed me in the direction of the "Waking Down" work (thanks!)... I hadn't looked into it before but it turns out that it matches exactly my perspective. It says that the earthly, dual side of life - with all that it entails (emotions, ups and downs, ego etc) is what needs to be embraced. We need to dive deeply into the pain, pleasure, separation, our egoic stuff - and allow it to be there (rather than attempting to transcend or supress it, or improve it or change it) And that diving into this dualness reveals the infinite aspect and you allow the infinite to shine through all the duality in you.

 

Funny thing is, I've been going on in other threads about the importance of relationship - and it seems that this kind of work requires the building of deep relationship - you relate with a person with all your 'stuff' on show (rather than hiding and supressing all the shadow elements) - and the extent to which you can be present with all your stuff on show whilst being witnessed by another human is the extent that you can allow the light of the void to shine whilst having all this 'stuff'.

 

There is an underlying assumption in all this that is very freeing - everything is perfect as it is - everything - even the doubts that come up about everything being perfect. And this assuption points to the fact that nothing needs to be changed and improved - this sets up the paradox of what spiritual work is - I find that where you encounter paradoxes and confusion is where you grow most. So back to the paradox of earthly life and heavenly enlightenment...

[zenbrook]

everything is perfect as it is

The perfect answer to your original question - given much more eloquently than I could have put it!

 

Peace,

ZenB

[林愛偉]

The perfect answer to your original question - given much more eloquently than I could have put it!

 

Peace,

ZenB

 

 

 

The process is all perfect. But can one come and go as they please?

 

Delving into all emotions without a hold on them will take one on an endless ride.

Which is not wrong.. it is just an endless ride. Whether one finds pleasure in it or not.

 

The manner here is with all the acceptance of what one feels and thinks and does,

though they may feel one with their emotions, whether it be pleasant or not, that oneness

is based on the advent of having the emotions.

If there are no emotions experienced, then one will say they are one with the voidness of emotions.

If that is so, then even the one is not "merged" or even one with emptiness. If emptiness is felt, it will pass.

If emptiness is entered, it isn't emptiness.

 

The process is that as long as there is a feeling entertained, there will be more to come from it and in

myriad shapes and forms with the idea that one is controlling it.

 

There is no supressing it because if one were to supress, it isn't proper cultivation. If one were to run wild with it, it still isn't proper cultivation.

 

When a person throws a stick at a lion, the lion usually stares directly at the person who threw the stick.

 

Either Buddhist or Daoist, if one runs wild on their emotions, it is detrimental to their cultivation..deeply indulging in them at one's will is also detrimental to their cultivation. One may develop abilities, but that doesn't equal purity of body and wisdom.

 

Peace,

Aiwei

[林愛偉]

For the sake of saying so, the void can be "merged" with.

The only way to do it is to drop one's thought of there being a thing to merge with and a merging of it.

Let all experiences be as they are. When one can produce the thought that is no where supported...

the void is thus.

 

I cannot stress any stronger the practice of meditation for this result.

 

 

Peace,

Aiwei

Edited July 25, 2007 by 林愛偉

[三江源]

Freeform, you know Jung said that we will not individuate without relationship. It's the alchemical vessel for transmutation of base matter into gold. So I'm with you 100%.

 

Over identification with 'the light' is a classic inflation which provokes the Shadow into great destructiveness and perversity, so I say it's healthy, to admit your shit , love it and share it!

 

Any slippery game which is basically avoidance of Shadow results in a grand slam, eventually, psychically, because the Self abhors inauthenticity.

 

I also believe and feel that Being Here, ( without one foot out of the door) in all it's glory and chaos, is the Way.

 

It's celebratory to me, to hold this position.

[freeform]

Let all experiences be as they are.

 

yes.

 

and you say that feelings come and they go and it's a perpetual process. I agree. This is life on earth. The sun and moon perpetualy circulate. But I get the idea from you that the higher aim is to surpass this - there is no you, no sun, no moon, no earth no movement or process - there is just this one, bright, endless void. But here I am, using words, typing on a computer. I got angry today in the queue at the post office. Not indulgently angry. Just a feeling that comes and goes.

 

Maybe a year ago, I was quite blind to this anger - the state of anger was 'normal' and hidden from people. I had a Buddhist friend who was similar in that way - he was angry, didn't know it, and had a good reason not to - it's all just illusion anyway - he was looking up, but never down - down is dual, therefore illusion.

 

Nevertheless I have had very brief moments in my life of this dissolusion of duality - the experiencing of no 'me' and no 'not me' at once. And it would be an acto of ignorance to dismiss this as unusefull in the 'real world' (dual world).

 

So that's what we're here to do - bring the two contradictions together - heaven and earth - and we're the humanity in between bringing the two together and creating 'love' and 'acceptance' (everything is perfect as it is ).

 

In Aiwei and Paul I see this luminous limitlessness, but I also have this sad feeling of 'lack of home' - how can I explain it?... lack of having your feet in the mud. It's the feeling I get with the archtypal story of someone leaving home, becoming rich, famous and glorious, but losing the connection with home, family and friends...

 

Then there is the paradox of the feminine approach of 'let it be as it is' and the masculine approach of 'disciplined spiritual work'... then the yang within yin and the yin within the yang - makes my head hurt thinking about it (so I'll stop )

 

[edit]

 

Thanks Cat. I totally agree... and you seem to have an easier time with words on this lol. And it's very interesting about Jung!

Edited July 25, 2007 by freeform

[林愛偉]

yes.

 

and you say that feelings come and they go and it's a perpetual process. I agree. This is life on earth. The sun and moon perpetualy circulate. But I get the idea from you that the higher aim is to surpass this - there is no you, no sun, no moon, no earth no movement or process - there is just this one, bright, endless void. But here I am, using words, typing on a computer. I got angry today in the queue at the post office. Not indulgently angry. Just a feeling that comes and goes.

 

Maybe a year ago, I was quite blind to this anger - the state of anger was 'normal' and hidden from people. I had a Buddhist friend who was similar in that way - he was angry, didn't know it, and had a good reason not to - it's all just illusion anyway - he was looking up, but never down - down is dual, therefore illusion.

 

Nevertheless I have had very brief moments in my life of this dissolusion of duality - the experiencing of no 'me' and no 'not me' at once. And it would be an acto of ignorance to dismiss this as unusefull in the 'real world' (dual world).

 

So that's what we're here to do - bring the two contradictions together - heaven and earth - and we're the humanity in between bringing the two together and creating 'love' and 'acceptance' (everything is perfect as it is ).

 

In Aiwei and Paul I see this luminous limitlessness, but I also have this sad feeling of 'lack of home' - how can I explain it?... lack of having your feet in the mud. It's the feeling I get with the archtypal story of someone leaving home, becoming rich, famous and glorious, but losing the connection with home, family and friends...

 

Then there is the paradox of the feminine approach of 'let it be as it is' and the masculine approach of 'disciplined spiritual work'... then the yang within yin and the yin within the yang - makes my head hurt thinking about it (so I'll stop )

 

[edit]

 

Thanks Cat. I totally agree... and you seem to have an easier time with words on this lol. And it's very interesting about Jung!

 

 

hahaha

 

Brother Paul and I are very much in the mudd.. its just that there is less personal mudd that we deal with.

 

One must be human in order to move from it. One can only become a Buddha from using a human body, or a body of its equivalent or higher.

Walk in the mudd, so to say, in order to move out of it. It doesn't mean there is no understanding of others who are there.. it just means that one can now drop in the rope and assist those who can reach...to get out as well. One can only teach others to get out unless they themselves have gotten out, or are atleast somewhere close.

 

Peace and Blessings to you. A fun thread indeed it has been.

 

Aiwei

Edited July 25, 2007 by 林愛偉

[Cameron]

Some nice inquiry going down here.

 

Here is another perspective I heard from Adyashanti. Hopefully it will be of some help.

 

We mostly see ourselves outside of the church and trying to bang on the door to let us in. When in reality we already are inside the church facing away from the inside of it and banging on the door.

 

Like..the banging on the door to "get somewhere" is the problem. We already dwell in the sacred. We live and have our being in God every moment and anywhere we may seemingly go.

 

It's like...we need to stop banging on the door of the church(that we are already inside of)and stop to look behind us and see we are already there!

 

Put a whole different perspective on struggling and striving and hitting on doors to get answers for me.

 

Full stop

[三江源]

 

 

Brother Paul and I are very much in the mudd.. its just that there is less personal mudd that we deal with.

 

Aiwei

 

woah.

 

where's RON JEREMY when you need him.

[林愛偉]

hahaha

 

Brother Paul and I are very much in the mudd.. its just that there is less personal mudd that we deal with.

 

 

Aiwei

 

 

Don't misunderstand what I say here.

 

What this means is that not only are we in the mudd of all things, we may not view it as mudd, and so it isn't as

heavy within our minds. It may be heavy for some but not for all.

THis statement does not point to any claims of any enlightenment or any awakening whatsoever.

It only points to the expedient of letting go. If one can let go, then what results is being lighter. When all is

let go of, there is illumination, which is great wisdom.

Thre is still a body, thus there are still things that have not been let go of.

 

Before this statement gets very misunderstood, let me clear that it is pointing to the teaching in the manner of Letting Go, putting down, and by no means was excluding, only pointing to lightness in manners of detachment.

 

Peace,

Aiwei

[fatherpaul]

 

 

 

 

In Aiwei and Paul I see this luminous limitlessness, but I also have this sad feeling of 'lack of home' - how can I explain it?... lack of having your feet in the mud. It's the feeling I get with the archtypal story of someone leaving home, becoming rich, famous and glorious, but losing the connection with home, family and friends...

 

 

 

everywhere is home or nowhere is home

 

nothing is the only something there is

and even that isnt.

 

cat, it is good you celebrate your liife

 

peace to you both,

paul

[三江源]

Don't misunderstand what I say here.

 

What this means is that not only are we in the mudd of all things, we may not view it as mudd, and so it isn't as

heavy within our minds. It may be heavy for some but not for all.

THis statement does not point to any claims of any enlightenment or any awakening whatsoever.

It only points to the expedient of letting go. If one can let go, then what results is being lighter. When all is

let go of, there is illumination, which is great wisdom.

Thre is still a body, thus there are still things that have not been let go of.

 

Before this statement gets very misunderstood, let me clear that it is pointing to the teaching in the manner of Letting Go, putting down, and by no means was excluding, only pointing to lightness in manners of detachment.

 

Peace,

Aiwei

 

I get the impression you are holding very tight to the notion of letting go...

[林愛偉]

I get the impression you are holding very tight to the notion of letting go...

 

 

Peace and Blessings

 

Amituofo

Edited July 25, 2007 by 林愛偉

[fatherpaul]

I get the impression you are holding very tight to the notion of letting go...

i

 

 

 

cultivating detachment is the same as cultivating attachment

[林愛偉]

i

cultivating detachment is the same as cultivating attachment

 

 

Having arrived at the other shore, even the boat is cast aside.

[三江源]

Peace and Blessings

 

Amituofo

 

 

On the internet, it's easy for this sort of response to look trite / like a cop out, because it gives so little that isnt formulaic.

[fatherpaul]

On the internet, it's easy for this sort of response to look trite / like a cop out, because it gives so little that isnt formulaic.

 

 

yes,

who can say who is who and what is what (on the internet)

better to know yourself, then it dosen't matter