Clairvoyance vs Immediate Knowledge

[deci belle]

The "What is Grasping?" thread was steered (almost immediately by its author into a discussion about how clairvoyance was somehow (interpreting a certain buddhist scripture) to be deemed advantageous or even necessary to seeing essence (experiencing sudden enlightenment).

 

I don't want to rag on that person's own thread anymore but I did want to stress that clairvoyance does not give anyone a leg-up on enlightenment— and for good reason.

 

I will try to be as direct as possible in describing why.

 

First, I've never heard the claim before, and its reference to scripture gives it much more importance than it warrants to one so gifted with clairvoyance, because, in terms of realizing ones essential nature, it then becomes an obstruction of one's own making (aren't they all).

 

2nd, the TTC exhausts the topic of augury in one line (chapter 38).

 

3rd, The Art of War goes as far as citing that its use is to be dispensed with entirely.

 

4th, the bum is simply in error coming to the conclusion that clairvoyance has any merit in terms of a gradual self-refinement leading to cessation of self because it causes one to cling to identification with that (false) self— and that is NOT advantageous.

 

I'm not clairvoyant so I know it isn't at all valid to assume that the ability to see that which has not yet come to pass is necessary to adapt selflessly to ordinary situations in the present— much less to see essence and enter the Tao in reality.

 

There is not a single thing wrong with being clairvoyant, but if one is going to entertain the view that this self-reifying condition is one that pre-disposes one to the fast-track leading to sudden realization (not to mention arriving at a virtue coeval with the subtle operation of the Great Vehicle of buddhas, one is even more handicapped than an ordinary ignoramus. Why?

 

Because views relative to self and other are the very reason for being sunk in delusion in the first place. And one so handicapped is doubly in error for being deluded (without knowing it) for one, then actually going to the trouble to manufacture and cling to the notion that a conditional characteristic relative to the false identity is somehow to be entertained as an advantage (in terms of the scriptural interpretation), that's two.

 

I realize the bum is not lording that interpretation over anybody else, or making claims how clairvoyance is indicative of an aspect of clarity (my take~ and it's true), but it is completely fallacious (and harmful to one's aspiration) none the less, to grasp this notion of clairvoyance ascribed to scripture on account of possessing its utility in the first place.

 

This is only because grasping self-concepts (or any views at all) are what keeps people bound by the personality's false identity. And that isn't even that subtle a veil.

 

I lied about my clairvoyance, but it is just part of the landscape (in my case).

 

The bum had the idea that immediate knowledge is somehow relative to one's own volition, and this is simply not the case, for we all know (or should know) that ordinary sensory perception relative to self and other is NEVER able to occur in the present.

 

Therefore, immediate knowledge is not relative to oneself, i.e., it is selfless knowledge.

 

Just this itself is enlightened mind, no different that one's own unborn nature.

 

Nothing whatsoever has a leg-up on presence, which is the root of the Way.

 

Wisdom is easy. What is difficult is in not using it.

 

The Tao Te Ching says "Augury is the flower of the Way, and the beginning of delusion."

 

For those whose desire is the realization of the cessation of the grasping mind would do well to forget views of self and make naught of them— even if scripture lauds it to the skies.

 

This is the way to make destiny dependent on oneself alone.

 

 

[MooNiNite]

"Augury is the flower of the Way, and the beginning of delusion."

 

beautiful.

[Captain Mar-Vell]

...

I lied about my clairvoyance, but it is just part of the landscape (in my case).

 

HA HA HA!!!

 

Liar, liar, pantz on fire!

 

 

/me bows.

dEZ.

xxx.

...

Edited April 27, 2014 by Captain Mar-Vell

[Tibetan_Ice]

.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[Nungali]

The thread title got me interested ... but after reading the underlying issues in the first para of the first post .... methinks there is another agenda afoot ? ? ?

[Captain Mar-Vell]

...

Sometimes having absolutely no view at all is the path (or non-path). This is for highly advanced practitioners (or non-practitioners).

 

XXX.

...

Edited April 28, 2014 by Captain Mar-Vell

[Rara]

The "What is Grasping?" thread was steered (almost immediately by its author into a discussion about how clairvoyance was somehow (interpreting a certain buddhist scripture) to be deemed advantageous or even necessary to seeing essence (experiencing sudden enlightenment).

 

I don't want to rag on that person's own thread anymore but I did want to stress that clairvoyance does not give anyone a leg-up on enlightenment and for good reason.

 

I will try to be as direct as possible in describing why.

 

First, I've never heard the claim before, and its reference to scripture gives it much more importance than it warrants to one so gifted with clairvoyance, because, in terms of realizing ones essential nature, it then becomes an obstruction of one's own making (aren't they all).

 

2nd, the TTC exhausts the topic of augury in one line (chapter 38).

 

3rd, The Art of War goes as far as citing that its use is to be dispensed with entirely.

 

4th, the bum is simply in error coming to the conclusion that clairvoyance has any merit in terms of a gradual self-refinement leading to cessation of self because it causes one to cling to identification with that (false) self and that is NOT advantageous.

 

I'm not clairvoyant so I know it isn't at all valid to assume that the ability to see that which has not yet come to pass is necessary to adapt selflessly to ordinary situations in the present much less to see essence and enter the Tao in reality.

 

There is not a single thing wrong with being clairvoyant, but if one is going to entertain the view that this self-reifying condition is one that pre-disposes one to the fast-track leading to sudden realization (not to mention arriving at a virtue coeval with the subtle operation of the Great Vehicle of buddhas, one is even more handicapped than an ordinary ignoramus. Why?

 

Because views relative to self and other are the very reason for being sunk in delusion in the first place. And one so handicapped is doubly in error for being deluded (without knowing it) for one, then actually going to the trouble to manufacture and cling to the notion that a conditional characteristic relative to the false identity is somehow to be entertained as an advantage (in terms of the scriptural interpretation), that's two.

 

I realize the bum is not lording that interpretation over anybody else, or making claims how clairvoyance is indicative of an aspect of clarity (my take~ and it's true), but it is completely fallacious (and harmful to one's aspiration) none the less, to grasp this notion of clairvoyance ascribed to scripture on account of possessing its utility in the first place.

 

This is only because grasping self-concepts (or any views at all) are what keeps people bound by the personality's false identity. And that isn't even that subtle a veil.

 

I lied about my clairvoyance, but it is just part of the landscape (in my case).

 

The bum had the idea that immediate knowledge is somehow relative to one's own volition, and this is simply not the case, for we all know (or should know) that ordinary sensory perception relative to self and other is NEVER able to occur in the present.

 

Therefore, immediate knowledge is not relative to oneself, i.e., it is selfless knowledge.

 

Just this itself is enlightened mind, no different that one's own unborn nature.

 

Nothing whatsoever has a leg-up on presence, which is the root of the Way.

 

Wisdom is easy. What is difficult is in not using it.

 

The Tao Te Ching says "Augury is the flower of the Way, and the beginning of delusion."

 

For those whose desire is the realization of the cessation of the grasping mind would do well to forget views of self and make naught of them even if scripture lauds it to the skies.

 

This is the way to make destiny dependent on oneself alone.

 

 

I know a world of Clairvoyants...all are climbing the same predatory ladder. It's a dark world where fame and ego overrides everything.

 

EDIT: If they are Clairvoyants at all, that is.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Rara

[Captain Mar-Vell]

...

I don't believe in dark adepts.

 

The one behind the username "maheosphet" here claimed to be a black tantric adept.

 

I hope I got the spelling right there.

 

It was so funny!

 

He tried to command me!

 

I was having hysterics!

 

xxx.

 

ps amended meheosphet to maheosphet to correct spelling.

 

...

Edited April 28, 2014 by Captain Mar-Vell

[Rara]

Oh you've opened up a can of worms there Cap'n!

[GrandmasterP]

Everybody has all the clairs.

We are eternal spirits inhabiting a temporary flesh and bones body.

The three main 'clairs' are

Voyance

Sentience

Audience.

 

Some have

Alience too.

 

Most folks get those laughed and argued out of them as they grow up and develop along with their egos.

We've all seen babies laughing and 'talking' to people in the room that nobody else can 'see'.

 

Seems to me on this topic is that some posters want to use it as a vehicle to promote religious Buddhism and bash us over the head with Buddhist 'scriptures' .

Strange innit that the guy himself Mr Buddha never wrote any of those?

That whole sutra n scriptures schtick all came afterwards from guys seeking to cash in on the brand.

Then there's the " have a pop at mediums" faction.

Any and every opportunity to denigrate the 'other' is a golden chance for some to take a swipe at anyone who does still exercise a clair or two into adulthood.

Thing is nobody will ever be talked or argued into believing anything.

Anybody who pays silly money out to a jobbing medium or psychic or related spiritual nostrum merchant - is wasting money, time and energy as a rule.

The world is full of shysters and most of us can spot those a mile off but some cannot.

Hence the dime store 'two grand for the programme' quacks around Taoism or 'Septic Peg' the £100 a sitting Psychic mystic flogging her nonsense to the gullible online and via Mind Body n Spirit media.

It's a business and businesspeople only care about their business.

Anyone who is interested in touching base with their own clairs or investigating these areas whlst keeping a hand on their wallet is best advised doing it through one of the established, ethically based spiritualist centres or churches.

Or check out a Shaman or similar who is connected to some viable, insured, regulated and 'known' temple , abbey or organization.

Beware the shysters who, as someone else noted on here tend to have that R in a circle 'trademark' attached to their product.

They're also very big on advertising as they need to keep attracting new customers due to the numbers or customers that they lose via disappointment and realisation that what is on sale is BS.

Edited April 27, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Jeff]

Well said TI.

 

As Buddha clearly stated, there is nothing but ongoing clarity. But, as you point out, if one actually drops the issues, fears and obstructions, there is nothing left to obstruct the view and radiant perception "expands".

 

Pursuing powers is a mental trap, but residing in what one truly is... Is known to be unbounded...

 

Best wishes.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Jeff

[GrandmasterP]

There's an almost delicious irony here.

 

Thesis-Anthithesis

 

From " Buddhists" already!

 

 

ROFL

Edited April 27, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[deci belle]

Nungali wrote:

The thread title got me interested ... but after reading the underlying issues in the first para of the first post .... methinks there is another agenda afoot ? ? ?

 

The agenda is that identifying characteristics in terms of oneself (much less as an advantage to transcending self) is error.

 

I do not want people to be in error (especially) as a result of their own gifts, dear.

 

What's your agenda, hmmmmmmm?

 

 

 

Tibetan Ice ought to quote A LOT LESS!! I didn't say they were your words~ but at this point I wish they were!

 

If you cannot see your subtle error and dispense with the need to validate your full-blown clairvoyance (to quote you), and just rest in the presence of your own immediate nonpsychological knowledge, selflessly adapting to ordinary circumstances~ you won't even miss what isn't working for your best interests in the least.

 

Now I know I've got a fish on the line… hook, line and sinker. hahhahahhaaa❤

 

 

 

 

ed note: add response to TI's post (that I didn't read)

Edited April 28, 2014 by deci belle

[Tibetan_Ice]

.

Edited April 29, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[BaguaKicksAss]

.

Edited April 28, 2014 by BaguaKicksAss

[idiot_stimpy]

I heard in Zen, searching for and obtaining mystical states of consciousness is not the point.

[skydog]

better

Edited April 28, 2014 by skydog

[GrandmasterP]

I heard in Zen, searching for and obtaining mystical states of consciousness is not the point.

 

Yep.

A zen master told me similar.

He was levitating at the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Sorry... Only kidding).

[Captain Mar-Vell]

...

...

[deci belle]

The thing about grasping is the nature of the false identity of the unreal personality.

 

The pointless point skewers it, the gateless gate traps it, and the hookless hook catches it.

 

And the further afield this fish goes the longer it trails its own line, until you have a real whopper stinking in a fry-pan to suit.

 

I see you are singing your own anthem here, mr Ice~ So it doesn't matter how many fish-heads you split into because for every one that can's swallow the hook, there's another that can't spit it out. And in spite of all these posturing heads I see there is but one shadow searching for its face.

 

Either you realize or you don't, so there is nothing factual in conceptually getting closer to the one realization you are already swimming in right now. It is neither near nor far. Until you can swallow the entire ocean in a single gulp, what constitutes arrival? You actually must take total responsibility for reality. This is the meaning of power. It's not just a matter of full-blown peeking into the future.

 

In the mean-time, where can this fish go?

 

Pity.

[ChiForce]

There are no distinctions.....your immediate knowledge is the knowledge of the future. Done.... What is the future and what is now anyway? If you don't grasp on at any particular moment, everything is in a state of change, in a state of flux, much like the Tao. Seriously, I have been receiving visions about the Ukrainian crisis. I have been informed that the crisis will enter into another stage...given with things are now, it is going to happen. Talking to my man Putin in his other ego and identity. I even received another vision indicating that the key to avert a civil war in Ukraine would be rested on who will get elected as the next president. heheheheh I think I have precognition ability but only to major world events and maybe about other people. Visions about myself are often too confusing to make any sense. When tragic events happened like the sinking of the South Korean ship or the missing Malaysian plane, I always wonder if I have some precognitive dreams about them. I had one few days before the Japan Tsunami hit Fukushima. I could still remember the menacing, "frighteningly beautiful" giant waves in my dream.

 

Anyway, paranormal super powers are the side effect of the mind to have entered into a second or higher states of jhana. Is no different than people knowing about their past lives.

Edited April 28, 2014 by ChiForce

[deci belle]

oh, it's the ChiForce/TI tag team!! …ugh.

 

Well, since you're done, dear~ I guess I'll have to clean up that little mess you left…

 

Immediate knowledge (once again) is not "yours". When you recive, this is not impersonally aware.

 

If you want to wax poetic about your paranormal premiere screenings, consider starting you own thread to that effect, dear. You could call it "ChiForce's Chinese Firedrill Theater".

 

Immediate knowledge is NOW, in the context of REAL-TIME situations, not shit yer gonna see on TV anyway (even if ya saw it first). How does your hodge-podge para-normalism equate "frighteningly beautiful" with reality, which is ordinary situations accessible to illumined and ignoramus alike without distinctions of self and other?

 

Immediate knowledge isn't a matter of no distictions— it is the impersonal vision of nonbeing within the context of creation. It isn't visible and it doesn't look any different from reality …because it is reality.

 

Since there are "no distinctions" within the particular (in terms of the absolute only— which Mr Force failed to distinguish), how do you equivocate "real" events in your mind with "no distinctions", hmmmmmm? Perhaps it is because you have no perspective of the one to distinguish from the other?

 

You are the equal of mr Ice in that you are happy as a clam to talk out of both sides of your mouth free-associating world-events that can be seen with the naked eye (with purely technological satellite imagery) without ever having had benefit of the perspective of your original face.

 

Those who receive paranormal visions of events all are sure to notice anyway are not worth recounting in the first place. Even sudden mystic illumination is categorically cryptic, at best, in terms of something that could be even remotely distinguished as imagery (that no one whatsoever witnesses), whereas mr Force's film-reel visions, are just like the movies (director's cut, no doubt)!

 

Being an a priori witness is not adapting to situations impersonally. It is just indicative of an habitual relationship with naturally impersonal awareness that sets oneself apart from appearances and deems this "objective reception", as if it were bestowed upon oneself due to clair-whatever-ance.

 

What is seen beyond the realm of distinctions (nothing mr Force has been willing to recount) is what is available to those whose reception in terms of immediate knowledge is impersonally, immaterially manifest, no different than the clear immaterial light of potential inherent within the DNA of ordinary situations (the nature of your own mind)— in order to spontaneously adapt to, and influence, the creative impersonally.

 

So were you able to influence the distinctless events in Japan to your satisfaction, mr Force?

 

 

 

 

 

ed note: add "spontaneously" in penultimate line

Edited April 28, 2014 by deci belle

[GrandmasterP]

I never ever get anything really useful such as lottery numbers ( winning) or which gee gee will run fastest in the Epsom Derby.

It's all towels and lost video games plus Uncle Bob saying hello from spirit with his thanks for the lovely funeral flowers.

Not much of a 'super' power at all really.

 

:-)

Edited April 28, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Nungali]

Nungali wrote:

 

The agenda is that identifying characteristics in terms of oneself (much less as an advantage to transcending self) is error.

 

I do not want people to be in error (especially) as a result of their own gifts, dear.

 

What's your agenda, hmmmmmmm?

 

Moi ! ?

 

Why, my little humming bird, it is to bathe in your gnosis ..... but in clean water ... not some second hand water that you have washed someone else off in.

[ChiForce]

oh, it's the ChiForce/TI tag team!! …ugh.

 

Well, since you're done, dear~ I guess I'll have to clean up that little mess you left…

 

Immediate knowledge (once again) is not "yours". When you recive, this is not impersonally aware.

 

If you want to wax poetic about your paranormal premiere screenings, consider starting you own thread to that effect, dear. You could call it "ChiForce's Chinese Firedrill Theater".

 

Immediate knowledge is NOW, in the context of REAL-TIME situations, not shit yer gonna see on TV anyway (even if ya saw it first). How does your hodge-podge para-normalism equate "frighteningly beautiful" with reality, which is ordinary situations accessible to illumined and ignoramus alike without distinctions of self and other?

 

Immediate knowledge isn't a matter of no distictions— it is the impersonal vision of nonbeing within the context of creation. It isn't visible and it doesn't look any different from reality …because it is reality.

 

Since there are "no distinctions" within the particular (in terms of the absolute only— which Mr Force failed to distinguish), how do you equivocate "real" events in your mind with "no distinctions", hmmmmmm? Perhaps it is because you have no perspective of the one to distinguish from the other?

 

You are the equal of mr Ice in that you are happy as a clam to talk out of both sides of your mouth free-associating world-events that can be seen with the naked eye (with purely technological satellite imagery) without ever having had benefit of the perspective of your original face.

 

Those who receive paranormal visions of events all are sure to notice anyway are not worth recounting in the first place. Even sudden mystic illumination is categorically cryptic, at best, in terms of something that could be even remotely distinguished as imagery (that no one whatsoever witnesses), whereas mr Force's film-reel visions, are just like the movies (director's cut, no doubt)!

 

Being an a priori witness is not adapting to situations impersonally. It is just indicative of an habitual relationship with naturally impersonal awareness that sets oneself apart from appearances and deems this "objective reception", as if it were bestowed upon oneself due to clair-whatever-ance.

 

What is seen beyond the realm of distinctions (nothing mr Force has been willing to recount) is what is available to those whose reception in terms of immediate knowledge is impersonally, immaterially manifest, no different than the clear immaterial light of potential inherent within the DNA of ordinary situations (the nature of your own mind)— in order to spontaneously adapt to, and influence, the creative impersonally.

 

So were you able to influence the distinctless events in Japan to your satisfaction, mr Force?

 

 

 

 

 

ed note: add "spontaneously" in penultimate line

My point is that you have to work with the real world with real world events!!! This isn't a classroom. This isn't a game. This isn't a science experiment. You can philosophize all you want. Ultimately, an enlightened individual can know the future "immediately" and even when he is about to die!!!!