Gateway to limitless being

[Jeff]

...

There is no guru or master apart from yourself. A non-existent master cannot help remove non-existent obstructions. He appears to do so for the sake of the show, and actors desiring to play roles they imagine themselves to be. His presence, is your presence. There is no presence. There is no show.

 

Remaining attached to the symbolic realm of words, illusory concepts of within or without, may be the most binding obstruction of all.

Sorry to intrude on your discussion, but the Shiva Sutras seem very clear on this point...

 

2.6. gururupāyaḥ

 

The master (guru) is the means.

[neti neti]

Sorry to intrude on your discussion, but the Shiva Sutras seem very clear on this point...

 

2.6. gururupāyaḥ

 

The master (guru) is the means.

No worries.

 

Indeed, the guru is the means for shaktopaya. Nonetheless, the guru is within you.

[Jeff]

Even as Shiva, the body simply moves. Shiva does not move the body. He is the ground upon which "power" manifests.

 

The jiva ignorantly assumes he moves the hand. When you move your hand, you don't think about moving it, and then move it. It simply happens. For the sake of communication, one could say it is "subconsciously" asked to be moved, and is then moved for you. Such is the illusion of free will. Your reasoning is a justification for what has already occurred. Time is an illusion. You are an illusion. Beware of Maya.

 

"That which is beyond mind, Parashiva or Nirguna Brahman, is even unaware of itself. It is the unborn, inexhaustible spring from which all energies burst forth. If everything is you, what does being conscious even mean and, what is there to control? Who is there to be enlightened, when you already are the essence of happiness? The pointers are of course valid but one must realize they are conveyed as such in order that they can be conceptualized, one step removed from the summit."

We seem to just keep going round and round... while I agree with things like time and individual bodies being an illusion, what I am attempting to describe is being able to sort of perceive at all layers (including no layer), but not being attached to any of them. While you seem to be describing some sort of "cessation".

 

I will give it one more shot to attempt to describe what I mean. This beautiful buddhist sutra sums up what I am trying to say perfectly...

 

From the Avatamsaka Sutra...

 

Great bodhisattvas have no attachment to Buddha and do not develop attachments;

they have no attachment to the teachings and do not develop attachments; they have

no attachment to lands and do not develop attachments; they have no attachments

to sentient beings and do not develop attachments. They do not see that there are

sentient beings, yet they carry on educational activity, civilizing and teaching ways

of liberation; they do not give up the practices of bodhisattvas with great compassion

and great commitment. Seeing buddhas and hearing their teachings, they act accordingly;

trusting the buddhas they plant roots of goodness, ceaselessly honoring and serving them.

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth.

 

They carry out practices of bodhisattvas for the sole purpose of saving sentient beings and yet

do not practice anything. Conforming to the essential nature of all buddhas, they develop a mind

like an immense mountain. They know all falsehood and delusion, and enter the door of omniscience.

Their knowledge and wisdom are broad and vast and unshakable, due to the attainment of true enlightenment.

This is the insight of practical knowledge of equally saving all sentient beings in the ocean of birth and death.

[neti neti]

We seem to just keep going round and round... while I agree with things like time and individual bodies being an illusion, what I am attempting to describe is being able to sort of perceive at all layers (including no layer), but not being attached to any of them. While you seem to be describing some sort of "cessation".

 

I will give it one more shot to attempt to describe what I mean. This beautiful buddhist sutra sums up what I am trying to say perfectly...

 

From the Avatamsaka Sutra...

 

Great bodhisattvas have no attachment to Buddha and do not develop attachments;

they have no attachment to the teachings and do not develop attachments; they have

no attachment to lands and do not develop attachments; they have no attachments

to sentient beings and do not develop attachments. They do not see that there are

sentient beings, yet they carry on educational activity, civilizing and teaching ways

of liberation; they do not give up the practices of bodhisattvas with great compassion

and great commitment. Seeing buddhas and hearing their teachings, they act accordingly;

trusting the buddhas they plant roots of goodness, ceaselessly honoring and serving them.

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth.

 

They carry out practices of bodhisattvas for the sole purpose of saving sentient beings and yet

do not practice anything. Conforming to the essential nature of all buddhas, they develop a mind

like an immense mountain. They know all falsehood and delusion, and enter the door of omniscience.

Their knowledge and wisdom are broad and vast and unshakable, due to the attainment of true enlightenment.

This is the insight of practical knowledge of equally saving all sentient beings in the ocean of birth and death.

 

I guess we'll continue to do so until the novelty wears off.

 

Your insistence on there being a being there to perceive layers(or a lack thereof) is unreal. Who knows they are perceiving? Even Universal Being is the equivalent of Absolute Nothingness. The descriptors appear as 'cessation' because the source of all polarities is beyond them. There is no source.

 

Words can only take us so far. The axe must be laid to the root, as it were. Change is inevitable within the jungle of the changeful. Be the unchanging.

 

Neither attachment nor aversion. Neither cruelty nor compassion. None are great, none are least. None are noble, none are lowly. No birth, no death. There is only Self, without a self.

 

Knowledge is a form of bondage. The one who knows not is all-knowing.

 

Where is the Bodhisattva?

[Jeff]

I guess we'll continue to do so until the novelty wears off.

 

Your insistence on there being a being there to perceive layers(or a lack thereof) is unreal. Who knows they are perceiving? Even Universal Being is the equivalent of Absolute Nothingness. The descriptors appear as 'cessation' because the source of all polarities is beyond them. There is no source.

 

Words can only take us so far. The axe must be laid to the root, as it were. Change is inevitable within the jungle of the changeful. Be the unchanging.

 

Neither attachment nor aversion. Neither cruelty nor compassion. None are great, none are least. None are noble, none are lowly. No birth, no death. There is only Self, without a self.

 

Knowledge is a form of bondage. The one who knows not is all-knowing.

 

Where is the Bodhisattva?

They are beyond, but yet partake. Empty, but yet full. Also, I am not saying that you have to stick around and help. That is your choice. With full realization I would agree that you can hit the escape button if you want. What I am saying is there are such beings that do decide to not just "cease", like as described in the sutra.

 

Let's try it from another view in terms of Shiva looking down at humans...

 

The following is from the the book The Secret Surpreme by Swami Lakshmanjoo. It describes the KS perspective of the nine types of aspirants (or grace given by Shiva to individuals) who follow the path. As you will see, there are many "types"...

 

...................

 

In the kingdom of spirituality. Lord Siva creates masters and disciples through His fifth act, the act of grace (anugraha). This grace is ninefold and, therefore. He creates masters and disciples in nine different ways.

 

The first and highest level of grace is called tivrativra sak-tipata. Tivrativra saktipata means "super supreme grace." When Lord Siva bestows super supreme grace on anyone, then that person becomes perfectly self-recognized. He knows his real nature completely and in perfection. At the same time, however, this kind of intense grace can not be resisted by his body, so he throws away his body and dies. This person becomes a master; however, he accomplishes the act of his mastery secretly in the deserving hearts of disciples. He is not visible in this world. Only those who are deserving experience his subtle existence.

 

The second intensity of grace is called tivramadhya saktipa-ta. This is "supreme medium grace." The effect of this grace of Lord Siva is that the recipient becomes completely and per-fectly illumined, but does not leave his body. He is said to be a pratibha guru, that is, a master who is made not by another master's initiation, but by his self, by his own grace. He expe-riences spontaneous enlightenment. These particular masters live in this world with their physical bodies for the upliftment of mankind.

 

The third intensity of grace is called tivramanda saktipata, which means "inferior supreme grace." In one who has received this grace the desire appears for going to the feet of a spiritual master. And the master that he finds has received the second intensity of grace, tivramadhya saktipata. This master is perfect. He is all knowing. There is no difference between this master and Siva. The master does not initiate him, rather, he simply touches him with his divine hand, or gazes upon him, or embraces him, and at that very moment this disciple, who is a recipient of medium supreme grace, perfectly tran-scends individuality and enters into that supreme transcenden-tal state without the need of practicing japa (recitation) or dhyana (contemplation), etc. Although he still experiences pleasure and pain in his physical body, it does not affect him, as his being has become supreme. That master who has received this particular intensity of grace, which is known as Rudra sakti-samavesah, is called Rudra sakti-samavistah because he has completely entered into the trance of Rudra sakti, the energy of Siva. He exhibits five signs which can be observed by others. The first sign is his intense love for Lord Siva. The second sign is that whenever he recites any mantra, the devata (deity) of that mantra appears to him at once without his having to wait. This is called mantrasiddhih. The third sign which can be observed is that he has control over the five elements. The fourth sign is that what-ever work he begins, he completes that work without defect. And the fifth sign is that either he is a master of all the scrip-tures or he becomes a great poet. Lord Siva, through these three supreme intensities of grace, creates masters in the kingdom of spirituality. With lower intensities of grace Lord Siva creates worthy disciples.

 

The fourth intensity of grace is called madhyativara sak-tipdta. This is "medium supreme grace." Through the effect of this intensity of grace, the disciple reaches the feet of that mas-ter who is absolutely perfect. But because the foundation estab-lished in the mind of this disciple is not quite completely per-fect, the mere touch or glance of this perfect master will not bring this disciple to enlightenment. He, therefore, initiates this disciple in the proper fashion by giving him a mantra and teaching him the proper way of treading. Through this initia-tion, the disciple becomes enlightened but during the period of the existence of his physical body, he is not completely satisfied with this enlightenment. When he leaves his physical body at the time of his death, however, he obtains completely satis-factory results from the initiation he had received earlier and becomes one with Siva.

 

The fifth intensity of grace is called madhyamadhya sak-tipdta, which means "medium middle grace." When Lord Siva bestows this particular intensity of grace upon someone, the intense desire for achieving the existence of Lord Siva arises in this person's mind. At the same time, however, he does not want to ignore the enjoyments of the world. He wants to enjoy worldly pleasures along with wanting to realize the existence of Lord Siva. Yet the intensity of his desire is only for achiev-ing Lord Siva's state. So, although he is initiated by a master and realizes his real nature as Lord Siva, his real self, and enjoys the bliss of that state while remaining in his physical body, simultaneously he also enjoys the pleasures of the world. But as these worldly pleasures, which take place in this mortal field of the universe, are not real pleasures, at the time of his leaving his physical body, he enters into the kingdom of para-dise (svargaloka) and enjoys all the worldly pleasures to his entire satisfaction. After he has satisfied his desire for worldly pleasures, he does not come down again into this world but is again initiated by his master, who is all-pervading, while he remains in heaven. Through this initiation, he becomes com-plete and realizes the reality of his supreme nature and he enters into the kingdom of Lord Siva and merges in Him com-pletely from heaven itself.

 

The sixth intensity of grace is called madhyamanda saktipa-ta, which means "medium inferior grace." The effect of this grace is very much like the effect of medium middle grace; however, the difference lies in predominance. The effect of medium middle grace is that in the mind of the disciple arises both the desire for attaining the state of Lord Siva and the desire for experiencing worldly pleasures. The predominant desire, however, is for attaining the state of Lord Siva. The effect of medium inferior grace is also that in the mind of this disciple arise both the desire for attaining the state of Lord Siva and the desire for experiencing worldly pleasures. However, the predominant desire here is for experiencing worldly pleas-ures. Though he achieves self-realization, it is not complete because of the agitation he experiences seeking worldly pleas-ures. So at the time of his leaving his physical body, this inten-sity of grace carries him from this mortal world first to para-dise, where he enjoys the pleasures of the world. But while in paradise he does not gain the fitness to begin practicing for attaining the realization of his self. He must, therefore, be again reborn and come down into this mortal field. And from that very birth he sentences his mind toward the fulfillment of his self-realization. Although his life in this mortal realm is very short, as Lord Siva wants to carry him quickly to his own state, he becomes absolutely complete in that short span of time and enters, in the end, into the transcendental state of Siva. The above three medium intensities of grace take place in the field of aspirants living in the kingdom of Sivadharma. Those aspirants have the inclination to achieve the state of self-realization at least half hourly during the day and at least twice during the night. The remaining period they keep aside for worldly pleasures.

 

The following three inferior intensities of grace - manda tivra (inferior supreme), manda madhya (inferior medium), and manda manda (inferior inferior) - take place in the field of aspirants living in lokadharmah, the kingdom of worldly life. These aspirants have the desire for achieving self-realization, the state of Lord Siva, only when the pains and pressures of this world become too much to bear. At that moment, they want to abandon everything and achieve self-realization but they are not able to, and though they want to leave this worldly life, they cannot. These aspirants have more tendency for worldly pleasure and less tendency for realizing their Self. But, as the grace of Lord Siva shines in them, in the end, which may take many lifetimes, they become one with the supreme being. This is the greatness of Lord Siva's grace - that no matter what intensity of His grace is with you, it will carry you to his nature in the end.

[neti neti]

They are beyond, but yet partake. Empty, but yet full. Also, I am not saying that you have to stick around and help. That is your choice. With full realization I would agree that you can hit the escape button if you want. What I am saying is there are such beings that do decide to not just "cease", like as described in the sutra.

 

 

Let's try it from another view in terms of Shiva looking down at humans...

 

The following is from the the book The Secret Surpreme by Swami Lakshmanjoo. It describes the KS perspective of the nine types of aspirants (or grace given by Shiva to individuals) who follow the path. As you will see, there are many "types"...

 

...................

 

 

There is no separation. Distinctions are of the mind only. Death is of the body only. Who is there to choose?

 

It's a lovely tradition, a wonderful story. Many chapters, many stories... your story, my story.

 

................

 

The Nature of Self-Realization -- Ashtavakra Gita

 

7.1

In me, the shoreless ocean,

the ark of universe drifts here and there

on the winds of its nature.

I am not impatient.

 

7.2

In me, the shoreless ocean,

let the waves of the universe

rise and fall as they will.

I am neither enhanced nor diminished.

 

7.3

In me, the shoreless ocean,

the universe is imagined.

I am still and formless.

In this alone I abide.

 

7.4

The Self is not in objects,

nor are objects in the pure and infinite Self.

The Self is tranquil, free of attachment and desire.

In this alone I abide.

 

7.5

I am Awareness alone.

The world is a passing show.

How can thoughts arise of acceptance or rejection?

And where?

[Jeff]

There is no separation. Distinctions are of the mind only. Death is of the body only. Who is there to choose?

 

It's a lovely tradition, a wonderful story. Many chapters, many stories... your story, my story.

 

............

 

It seems we simply have different views on a few things. Thanks for the discussion.

[dwai]

I think both perspectives are simply perspectives. The ultimate is not aware of being aware in the same way the sun is not aware of illumination. But it is pure awareness.

 

I used to try to differentiate awareness and consciousness in some acrobatic mode of the intellect, but really they are the same.

 

The biggest problem is syntactical imho, and is bound to cause contradictions and paradoxes when we try to articulate the indescribable.

 

That which is simultaneously nothing and everything (as pure potentiality) contains all perspectives and descriptions within itself. But is not absolutely any one of these. This is what Neti neti is trying to convey imho.

What Jeff is trying to express is that there is a volitinary action that is taken by a realized mind-body complex to become like a "bodhisattva", out of compassion (not for anyone is general but because compassion is his/her nature now).

 

My take on what one would call a jeevanmukta or zhenren is one who takes no action on his/her own volition. Yet all action/non-action happens as needed/not needed. This is imho what jeff is getting at. Yet I feel that for a jeevanmukta there are only happenings as he/she is already free of the personality. Therefore they are empty and free...not attached to any position, they can be infinite or nothing as the need arises in the dualistic world. In the absolute sense they are pure being!

 

That being said, would the "nonvolition" of the sage not be the volition of the absolute/Brahman/Dao? There is no volition in the relative sense because the relative being is not there anymore. But what seem like happenings are also the doing of the Self itself. So there it is the volition of the pure self...

Edited January 28, 2017 by dwai

[Spotless]

I would agree that his description would fit with many classical Hindu views, but his being "nothing" is only a piece of the puzzle in many traditions. Additionally, he is describing being a gateway or channeling some broader being (or thing) and hence describing a dualistic situation both for himself and the person he is being guru to. As the Zen parable describes...

 

First there is a mountain, then no mountain, then there is a mountain again...

 

It would seem to be that Satguru is stating there is only no mountain.

He is not describing "being a gateway or channeling some broader being (or thing) and hence describing a dualistic situation"

 

He is speaking of a doorway into the world of non-attachment. Hence he "knows" nothing. As this is an unattached state.

A doorway with no doorkeeper - no position - If you enter you have not left - only that which did not exist is no longer.

 

He is stating that the presence that he is is the "doorway". It is not a doorway per say - you are already there but you are lost in the clinging state - it is like noticing you are as much the Air surrounding you as you are the you that you are preoccupied with.

You do not think of the Air as a doorway - but the air does not have attachment and it is as much a door as he is - but it does not speak english and yet your physical life is always about 1 minute from death without an incoming supply of it.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Spotless

[Jeff]

He is not describing "being a gateway or channeling some broader being (or thing) and hence describing a dualistic situation"

 

He is speaking of a doorway into the world of non-attachment. Hence he "knows" nothing. As this is an unattached state.

A doorway with no doorkeeper - no position - If you enter you have not left - only that which did not exist is no longer.

 

He is stating that the presence that he is is the "doorway". It is not a doorway per say - you are already there but you are lost in the clinging state - it is like noticing you are as much the Air surrounding you as you are the you that you are preoccupied with.

You do not think of the Air as a doorway - but the air does not have attachment and it is as much a door as he is - but it does not speak english and yet your physical life is always about 1 minute from death without an incoming supply of it.

The challenge with your "air" theory is his own statements in the document. He specifically states...

 

"If they sense me as too sweet, they will make me bigger than their seeking, which is not good. If they sense me as too terrible, they will give up their seeking, which is not good either. I am crafting a personality that creates enough of both so that their seeking never dies."

 

Does "air" craft a personality? Does air consciously think in terms or changing its own personality into some other personality?

[Jeff]

I think both perspectives are simply perspectives. The ultimate is not aware of being aware in the same way the sun is not aware of illumination. But it is pure awareness.

I used to try to differentiate awareness and consciousness in some acrobatic mode of the intellect, but really they are the same.

The biggest problem is syntactical imho, and is bound to cause contradictions and paradoxes when we try to articulate the indescribable.

That which is simultaneously nothing and everything (as pure potentiality) contains all perspectives and descriptions within itself. But is not absolutely any one of these. This is what Neti neti is trying to convey imho.

What Jeff is trying to express is that there is a volitinary action that is taken by a realized mind-body complex to become like a "bodhisattva", out of compassion (not for anyone is general but because compassion is his/her nature now).

My take on what one would call a jeevanmukta or zhenren is one who takes no action on his/her own volition. Yet all action/non-action happens as needed/not needed. This is imho what jeff is getting at. Yet I feel that for a jeevanmukta there are only happenings as he/she is already free of the personality. Therefore they are empty and free...not attached to any position, they can be infinite or nothing as the need arises in the dualistic world. In the absolute sense they are pure being!

That being said, would the "nonvolition" of the sage not be the volition of the absolute/Brahman/Dao? There is no volition in the relative sense because the relative being is not there anymore. But what seem like happenings are also the doing of the Self itself. So there it is the volition of the pure self...

I think part of the challenge here is that I am just trying to point out that different traditions describe different "things" in terms of what one could call enlightenment. I am not trying to say that anyone is right or wrong, was just trying to show (as I stated in the beginning of this thread), that what KS, Buddhism, Taoism and Mystical Christianity describe as what happens is different. I beleive my many quotes have shown that. Many traditions just do not see the end game as sort of "ceasing into" Self/Brahman. Here now is an example from the gospel of Thomas...

 

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

 

This verse is essentially saying the same thing as TTC 28.

[dwai]

I think part of the challenge here is that I am just trying to point out that different traditions describe different "things" in terms of what one could call enlightenment. I am not trying to say that anyone is right or wrong, was just trying to show (as I stated in the beginning of this thread), that what KS, Buddhism, Taoism and Mystical Christianity describe as what happens is different. I beleive my many quotes have shown that. Many traditions just do not see the end game as sort of "ceasing into" Self/Brahman. Here now is an example from the gospel of Thomas...

 

2. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"

 

This verse is essentially saying the same thing as TTC 28.

 

The reigning/ruling thing seems too literal an interpretation imho. That's my issue with abrahamic religions in general - to want to have "dominion"...just seems misguided to me.

 

 

Why does a being that is "all" need to reign? And over what? His/her own Self (if all is indeed the Self)? That seems to be a dualistic perspective.

[Jeff]

The reigning/ruling thing seems too literal an interpretation imho. That's my issue with abrahamic religions in general - to want to have "dominion"...just seems misguided to me.

Why does a being that is "all" need to reign? And over what? His/her own Self (if all is indeed the Self)? That seems to be a dualistic perspective.

I personally think it is a mistake to say that the teachings of Jesus are simply "abrahmic in general". That is like Kashmir Shaivism is the same as "Hindu in general". Also, you are basing your view in your perceived concept of "Self". There is no "Self" in Buddhism, Taoism or Mystical Christianity. That is an issue with Hindu religions in general.

 

With a "Christ", "Buddha" or "ruler immortal", all personal desires have dropped. They just realize "all", but stick around to help. That helping takes the form of some sort of "useful upgrade" for sentient beings. Buddhism even has the concept of the three different "layers" (bodies) to help at different levels in your concept of Mara.

 

In the TTC...

 

When the block is carved, it becomes useful.

When the sage uses it, he becomes the ruler.

Thus, "A great tailor cuts little."

 

In the gospel of Thomas...

 

When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.

 

In Kashmir Shaivism...

 

"The question is thus appropriate because contentment (enlightenment) is not possible without a conscious realization. Contentment is of two kinds. The first is effected by means of absorption (samavesa) and consists of magical powers(ruler stuff). The second is attained by reaching a condition of conscious heart-felt realization, and it is the state of being liberated while still alive."

 

In Buddhism...

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth.

[Pilgrim]

He is not describing "being a gateway or channeling some broader being (or thing) and hence describing a dualistic situation"

 

He is speaking of a doorway into the world of non-attachment. Hence he "knows" nothing. As this is an unattached state.

A doorway with no doorkeeper - no position - If you enter you have not left - only that which did not exist is no longer.

 

He is stating that the presence that he is is the "doorway". It is not a doorway per say - you are already there but you are lost in the clinging state - it is like noticing you are as much the Air surrounding you as you are the you that you are preoccupied with.

You do not think of the Air as a doorway - but the air does not have attachment and it is as much a door as he is - but it does not speak english and yet your physical life is always about 1 minute from death without an incoming supply of it.

Exactly. Well said. & Simple

Edited January 29, 2017 by Pilgrim

[Pilgrim]

I very much like your story. But, he did not carry his anger to the extreme. In your story, he realized the futility of such things and let it go... he simply walked away from it... and dropped his anger.

 

In our discussion, I would argue that with stepping away from the extreme, he refound his balance and the natural peace inside (or underneath). IMHO, your story seems to disprove your own position. To be consistent with your position, would he not instead become the worlds greatest ever murderer and thief, pushing it to the limit and then becoming enlightened from it. Exactly like your previous 100% yang example leading to perfect consciousness?

I agree he did not carry anger to the extreme.

 

I do not see this story as indicating though that he dropped anything let alone anger. He did not realize the futility of anger and let it go. He did not simply walk away. He was so miserable with it in fact he went to extremes to be rid of himself as he was.

 

What he did was enter Samadhi for a long period of time, the 7 years seems to indicate the severity of the entanglement of the Jiva with the forest of anger.

 

By entering Samadhi he sterilized the field so the seeds of hatred could no longer grow. With the field cleared of a particular crop another one became able to flourish.

 

The outward signs of his samadhi impacting natures environment are meant as an indicator of the degree of change.

 

This however is at the different end of the pendulums swing, there is no indication of a balance in the story.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Pilgrim

[dwai]

I personally think it is a mistake to say that the teachings of Jesus are simply "abrahmic in general". That is like Kashmir Shaivism is the same as "Hindu in general". Also, you are basing your view in your perceived concept of "Self". There is no "Self" in Buddhism, Taoism or Mystical Christianity. That is an issue with Hindu religions in general.

 

With a "Christ", "Buddha" or "ruler immortal", all personal desires have dropped. They just realize "all", but stick around to help. That helping takes the form of some sort of "useful upgrade" for sentient beings. Buddhism even has the concept of the three different "layers" (bodies) to help at different levels in your concept of Mara.

 

In the TTC...

 

When the block is carved, it becomes useful.

When the sage uses it, he becomes the ruler.

Thus, "A great tailor cuts little."

 

In the gospel of Thomas...

 

When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all.

 

In Kashmir Shaivism...

 

"The question is thus appropriate because contentment (enlightenment) is not possible without a conscious realization. Contentment is of two kinds. The first is effected by means of absorption (samavesa) and consists of magical powers(ruler stuff). The second is attained by reaching a condition of conscious heart-felt realization, and it is the state of being liberated while still alive."

 

In Buddhism...

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth.

Yet all siddhis are considered just side attractions to the main thing

 

Please don't get me wrong when I mentioned "abrahamic". I'm well aware of the mystical traditions therein (and also the general reception they got historically...and they were the folks who "got it")...

 

Based on what I've learnt and have been taught, there is no "volition" left as there is no limited being left. So there is no "ruler" aside from that One nondual Self. If there are other "individual" beings then the are back in duality. Some masters like Babaji do exist, but he too is nothing but the swarupa of the unlimited...and not a separate "individual" ( as all are in him).

[Jeff]

I agree he did not carry anger to the extreme.

 

I do not see this story as indicating though that he dropped anything let alone anger. He did not realize the futility of anger and let it go. He did not simply walk away. He was so miserable with it in fact he went to extremes to be rid of himself as he was.

 

What he did was enter Samadhi for a long period of time, the 7 years seems to indicate the severity of the entanglement of the Jiva with the forest of anger.

 

By entering Samadhi he sterilized the field so the seeds of hatred could no longer grow. With the field cleared of a particular crop another one became able to flourish.

 

The outward signs of his samadhi impacting natures environment are meant as an indicator of the degree of change.

 

This however is at the different end of the pendulums swing, there is no indication of a balance in the story.

Seems reasonable that 7 years of straight Samadhi could clear away the crap and leave the slate blank. A blank slate is balanced.

 

Bad karma changed to good karma is still karma. Realization is beyond karma.

[Brian]

I think both perspectives are simply perspectives. The ultimate is not aware of being aware in the same way the sun is not aware of illumination. But it is pure awareness.

 

I used to try to differentiate awareness and consciousness in some acrobatic mode of the intellect, but really they are the same.

 

The biggest problem is syntactical imho, and is bound to cause contradictions and paradoxes when we try to articulate the indescribable.

 

That which is simultaneously nothing and everything (as pure potentiality) contains all perspectives and descriptions within itself. But is not absolutely any one of these. This is what Neti neti is trying to convey imho.

What Jeff is trying to express is that there is a volitinary action that is taken by a realized mind-body complex to become like a "bodhisattva", out of compassion (not for anyone is general but because compassion is his/her nature now).

 

My take on what one would call a jeevanmukta or zhenren is one who takes no action on his/her own volition. Yet all action/non-action happens as needed/not needed. This is imho what jeff is getting at. Yet I feel that for a jeevanmukta there are only happenings as he/she is already free of the personality. Therefore they are empty and free...not attached to any position, they can be infinite or nothing as the need arises in the dualistic world. In the absolute sense they are pure being!

 

That being said, would the "nonvolition" of the sage not be the volition of the absolute/Brahman/Dao? There is no volition in the relative sense because the relative being is not there anymore. But what seem like happenings are also the doing of the Self itself. So there it is the volition of the pure self...

Thank you, dwai, for introducing me to the word Jeevanmukta.

[Pilgrim]

Seems reasonable that 7 years of straight Samadhi could clear away the crap and leave the slate blank. A blank slate is balanced.

Bad karma changed to good karma is still karma. Realization is beyond karma.

Ah but he was not a blank slate.

[Jeff]

Yet all siddhis are considered just side attractions to the main thing

Please don't get me wrong when I mentioned "abrahamic". I'm well aware of the mystical traditions therein (and also the general reception they got historically...and they were the folks who "got it")...

Based on what I've learnt and have been taught, there is no "volition" left as there is no limited being left. So there is no "ruler" aside from that One nondual Self. If there are other "individual" beings then the are back in duality. Some masters like Babaji do exist, but he too is nothing but the swarupa of the unlimited...and not a separate "individual" ( as all are in him).

Yes, I agree that siddhis are a potential for great attachment. But, as clarity increases they exist as one shifts to being. They are found in the phase of moving from Jiva to Shiva. But, if you want them, you never find them. As the desire for them itself, creates the separation from Shiva that allows them in the first place.

 

Also, I completely understand what you are saying on the concept of cessation into Self. I have just found that there are sort of three directions one may "go" based upon underlying view. The first is your cessation. The second is the Buddha, Christ or ruler immortal. And, the third direction is that of the (relative) immortal.

 

To help differentiate these possible outcomes and different views, all traditions simplify down to these two simple questions...

 

1. Are there such things as "separate" beings?

2. And, is it possible to help these other beings?

[dwai]

Yes, I agree that siddhis are a potential for great attachment. But, as clarity increases they exist as one shifts to being. They are found in the phase of moving from Jiva to Shiva. But, if you want them, you never find them. As the desire for them itself, creates the separation from Shiva that allows them in the first place.

 

Also, I completely understand what you are saying on the concept of cessation into Self. I have just found that there are sort of three directions one may "go" based upon underlying view. The first is your cessation. The second is the Buddha, Christ or ruler immortal. And, the third direction is that of the (relative) immortal.

 

To help differentiate these possible outcomes and different views, all traditions simplify down to these two simple questions...

 

1. Are there such things as "separate" beings?

2. And, is it possible to help these other beings?

Relatively, answer 1 is yes.

Absolutlely it is no.

If relatively, then yes. If absolutely then any help is a result of the Self seeking to unveil itself. So while the help works in the dualistic world sense, it is of no consequence in the nondual...

[Jeff]

Relatively, answer 1 is yes.

Absolutlely it is no.

If relatively, then yes. If absolutely then any help is a result of the Self seeking to unveil itself. So while the help works in the dualistic world sense, it is of no consequence in the nondual...

I had meant the questions more in the absolute sense. And, since for you there are really no sentient beings (only Self), then it leads to cessation. As an example, in Taoism there are sentient beings, and then depending on the tradition it is possible to help or not, hence it leads to immortal or ruler immortal.

[dwai]

I had meant the questions more in the absolute sense. And, since for you there are really no sentient beings (only Self), then it leads to cessation. As an example, in Taoism there are sentient beings, and then depending on the tradition it is possible to help or not, hence it leads to immortal or ruler immortal.

 

Of course their are sentient beings (Jivas). But that is always at the relative level. At the absolute level, there is only the Self (Dao).

The concept of "immortal" is misunderstood too imho. Immortals are jeevanmuktas. They are free and therefore free from the cycle of birth and death. They can if they so choose to, leave the relative existence in a puff of smoke.

 

I remember sitting at a dinner table during a seminar with Master Liao, who talked at length about this. He said, how powerful you are in terms of spiritual power and closeness to Dao is evident in how you die. If you die with pain, suffering, etc you are not at as high a level as someone who can simply dematerialize their physical body (rainbow body).

 

He talked about how he was invited to Tibet by the Chinese govt officials to see some of the monks there disappear (rainbow body) with many observers present. Some disappeared without any trace. Others disappeared with loud explosions that left burn marks where they stood. The higher ones were able to disappear without any residual effect. Those who left residues still had some attachments...

 

I don't know if that's much of a yardstick, but just another perspective. Master Liao is as dyed-in-wool a Daoist (and an extremely powerful one at that) as one gets...and yet he was talking about that. Not so much about being a ruler, etc etc.

[Jeff]

Of course their are sentient beings (Jivas). But that is always at the relative level. At the absolute level, there is only the Self (Dao).

The concept of "immortal" is misunderstood too imho. Immortals are jeevanmuktas. They are free and therefore free from the cycle of birth and death. They can if they so choose to, leave the relative existence in a puff of smoke.

 

I remember sitting at a dinner table during a seminar with Master Liao, who talked at length about this. He said, how powerful you are in terms of spiritual power and closeness to Dao is evident in how you die. If you die with pain, suffering, etc you are not at as high a level as someone who can simply dematerialize their physical body (rainbow body).

 

He talked about how he was invited to Tibet by the Chinese govt officials to see some of the monks there disappear (rainbow body) with many observers present. Some disappeared without any trace. Others disappeared with loud explosions that left burn marks where they stood. The higher ones were able to disappear without any residual effect. Those who left residues still had some attachments...

 

I don't know if that's much of a yardstick, but just another perspective. Master Liao is as dyed-in-wool a Daoist (and an extremely powerful one at that) as one gets...and yet he was talking about that. Not so much about being a ruler, etc etc.

 

 

Do you notice that you are imposing your views of Self in your concept of the Dao? Where does the Tao Te Ching talk about anything like Self?

 

Also, this point on ultimate Self is the fundamental break that Buddha initiated.  Emptiness is not the same as Self.

 

Finally, I am not trying to say anyone is right or wrong, just push the point of greater discernment.

[johndoe2012]

I had meant the questions more in the absolute sense. And, since for you there are really no sentient beings (only Self), then it leads to cessation. As an example, in Taoism there are sentient beings, and then depending on the tradition it is possible to help or not, hence it leads to immortal or ruler immortal.

Does free will exist at the level you are talking about?

 

Independent of circumstances or is the helping a spontaneous event being witnessed?

Edited January 30, 2017 by johndoe2012