Is non-duality actually a fundamental truth, or just another philosophy?

[3bob]

3 hours ago, 3bob said:

 

I'd say the Sat Guru is normally the most or absolute renunciate, without husband or wife or kids although they are a truly compassionate being!   I'd also say that a house holder can not reach that level although they may reach very, very far.

 

Dwai, in the context of:   "Sanyasin: This is someone who has renounced the world and lives in poverty while trying to come to self-realization (enlightenment/moksha). It may be done as one of the natural stages of Hindu life. After the householding phase, when someone retires, they are expected to devote the end part of their lives to spiritual pursuit. In ancient times one would enter Sanyasin-hood and enter the woods to live a life of chastity and renunciation away from the pleasures of the world.

Some unusual individuals may skip over the householder and marriage phase of life and go straight to Sanyasin, living as a monk.

Wikipedia tells us there are subtypes of sannyasi in accordance with socio-religious context. Traditionally there were four types of forest hermits with different stages of dedication.  These four were:

1. Kutichaka
2. Bahudaka
3. Hamsa
4. Paramahamsa

More recently, in modern observation there are two types of “ekadanda” (literally single stick) and “tridanda’ (triple rod or stick) saffron robed monks. Specific practices differ slightly between these two groups."

Edited September 4, 2018 by 3bob

[Spotless]

Lets take a group of possible practices from a householder / monk:

 

If one wakes up at 3:30 am and meditates for an hour they will need at least 1 hour less sleep and they will have more patience and overall clarity.

 

If one meditates in the evening say from 9-10pm (and this can very slightly to accommodate schedules, family movie time etc.) they will interrupt nothing in the family and have better sleep.

 

One can easily have a morning practice, afternoon practice and or evening and certainly weekend practice - any one or all of them depending on duration and that duration is flexible to each time frame.

 

Diet can be easily modified to accommodate the householder/monk with no problem and diet changes are a certain need for the more serious. 

 

Devotion creates no strain on a householder/monk

 

Loving ones family creates no strain on a householder / monk

 

In times of great need for more practice it is generally easy to practice more in the evening and early morning hours and extend the weekend times. Generally this is not needed as frequently as might be thought.

 

If one has reached a state of consistent Wakefulness - in other words one is Awake while listening to oneself snoring and wife snoring - then getting "up and going" in the morning is non existent - one is already awake and at that point many practices have long since either stopped altogether or they have been greatly reduced or turned into constant practice and often only from time to time require blocks of time.

 

In the initial stages one may attend a teaching one or two or three times a week - possibly more and it is easily done with children - though the total amount would depend on how many children and what the age is and the capabilities of ones wife and if you are able to hire help and also how well the child or children sleep - my son since birth was always a very good and long sleeper - some children are not so easy - so you adapt.

 

Some teachings offer daycare!

 

Many people work at home, many people have their own business and can set their own custom hours. Some companies have meditation rooms. Many jobs do not require travel all over the world and huge time away from your family - this is true of about 98% of jobs and so I am perplexed that this has been a problem that apparently must be overcome for a householder - it is rarely a problem.

 

Also - if a job interferes with your practice and practice is of extreme importance - then you get a job that does not require all the galavanting around the globe - it is never an insurmountable problem - unless you believe it to be in which case it will be.

 

A Monestary / Monk does the following:

Early morning, late afternoon and late evening practice/devotion - often with silent work and contemplation and breath in between. 

A Householder/Monk can easily have early morning and late evening practice devotion - and much work can be done in silence and with breath work - posture work - attention centering and skillful means and mindfulness.

 

Monestary / Monk almost always has a significant diet change

A Householder / Monk can just as easily have a significant diet change

 

A Monestary / Monk may have to find a different job than originally given because they are making change that require changes in the daily routine - and Monestaries that are not mired in dogma and punishment will accommodate the spiritual need of a monk. And if this turns into a problem they can change monestaries, teachers or simply wake up and abide in teaching and devotion if this is their way.

 

A Householder / Monk may have to find a different job at one point or another - or perhaps take over the duties for raising the kids during the day - while the significant other works. This means that after taking them off to preschool or regular school he/she may have all day to practice in between pickups and drop-offs.

 

A Monestary / Monk may take a two week intensive within the Monestary.

A Householder / Mond may take a two week intensive when their child goes off to a camp - or any number of other scenarios.

 

A Monestary / Monk may take a vow of silence for a year

A Householder / Monk may take a vow of silence for a year:

I know of one Real Estate developer and architect that did so while working full steam. 

I know of another that had 5 children - 5 developmentally disabled children to boot!

 

A Monestary / Monk may reach a plateau in which he/she would greatly benifit from a trip or time away but be unable to afford or do such a thing. 

 

A Householder / Monk may have considerable means to hire help, take long trips with the whole family, purchase land and buildings for a retreat or retreat center - the possibilities are considerably expanded both for faliure and for practice. Its is also hard to hide in a surrounding of ever changing kids and their friends and noise and wife and business dealings. 

 

It can be extremely easy to hide in plain sight at a Monestary - and be a child molester for decades and the like. "Free" workers are often not held to a very high standard other than the simple rules. It is easy to hide, easy to sleep in what can easily become the trance of regimented daily life.

 

The True Monk is a behavioral set that is not limited to monestaries - it is a certain commitment to the spiritual life and practice - and one can be a Monk in plain sight on a corporate board, on a construction site, baby sitting and child rearing, as a mail man or a bus driver. 

 

And Monkey Mind can make everything impossible or a great thing to put off until tomorrow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[3bob]

I think some of that can work out spotless but not with everyone or everywhere... 

 

Btw, isn't too much harping on monkey mind,   another form of monkey mind?

[Bindi]

45 minutes ago, 3bob said:

I think some of that can work out spotless but not with everyone or everywhere... 

 

Btw, isn't too much harping on monkey mind,   another form of monkey mind?

 

Nothing wrong with monkey mind anyway from my dualistic perspective, it's just not well aligned with the 'monkey doer' - it's like a low level commander who never connects properly with the ennabling force it was designed to direct... until it does connect.

 

We need some level in ourselves that can very efficiently be able to feed ourselves, after planning on how to get our food in the first place, finding somewhere safe to sleep, protecting ourselves from the elements etc, maybe even 'higher' chores like healing our bodies, healing our psyches etc.  

 

Looking after the human level and all its needs to be perfectly healthy on all physical and mental and emotional levels. 'Spiritual' is admittedly a different level, I just don't like the dismissing of the value and potential of 'monkey' mind.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Bindi

[3bob]

To me the term "monkey mind" per its common definition is not suited to fulfill that Maslow's type list of needs..   

[Bindi]

Fair enough, to me they are the same. The mind misaligned gets the title monkey mind, and maybe even rightfully so, but I always believed (and still do) that this same misaligned mind could fulfil its full 'earth based' potential if it was re-educated and realigned. 

[Apech]

I've always had a problem with the Buddhist preference for the monastic lifestyle.  I guess its a good idea to have the time and space to practice and study - but that detachment from everyday life seems to me more of a limitation than a benefit.  But I do recognise that at the time of the Buddha being a householder was not the same as we mean today.  It was not having a house, two kids and the 9-5 job.  It meant the person responsible for an estate, with an extended family, workers and servants.  It also implied a daily round of social and religious commitments which were onerous.  Also to be born in mind is that we live in an age of unparalleled luxury, where we can usually make some time for ourselves - whereas for most of history mankind has lived struggling to survive (unless they were a member of an elite).  In this environment it makes sense to create a monk lifestyle which removes you from the daily grind.  But today, in the West certainly not so much.

 

 

[doc benway]

14 hours ago, 3bob said:

 

so apparently you agree that a person can not do both types of dharma at the same time and do justice to both...

 

 

I don't see different types of dharma, rather dharma incorporated into different types of lifestyle.

 

 

14 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

I am looking more at secular life as my practice.

 

 

Keeping practice on the cushion can only take us so far.

 

[3bob]

2 hours ago, steve said:

 

I don't see different types of dharma, rather dharma incorporated into different types of lifestyle.

 

Keeping practice on the cushion can only take us so far.

 

 

well Steve  couldn't that become a slippery slope if dharma (as spiritual law) is adapted to fit lifestyles,  instead of truly being incorporated as the lead factor...many in the west have "incorporated' (so to speak) the hell out of things from A-Z.

 

and regarding the "cushion",  what do you think of sitting next to a wall in silence for 9 years like Bohidharma is said or is recorded as having done?    

[dwai]

17 hours ago, 3bob said:

 

Dwai, in the context of:   "Sanyasin: This is someone who has renounced the world and lives in poverty while trying to come to self-realization (enlightenment/moksha). It may be done as one of the natural stages of Hindu life. After the householding phase, when someone retires, they are expected to devote the end part of their lives to spiritual pursuit. In ancient times one would enter Sanyasin-hood and enter the woods to live a life of chastity and renunciation away from the pleasures of the world.

Some unusual individuals may skip over the householder and marriage phase of life and go straight to Sanyasin, living as a monk.

Wikipedia tells us there are subtypes of sannyasi in accordance with socio-religious context. Traditionally there were four types of forest hermits with different stages of dedication.  These four were:

1. Kutichaka
2. Bahudaka
3. Hamsa
4. Paramahamsa

More recently, in modern observation there are two types of “ekadanda” (literally single stick) and “tridanda’ (triple rod or stick) saffron robed monks. Specific practices differ slightly between these two groups."

I think the Varnāshrama concept in Hindu dharma is very important to keep in mind. Also, the four purushārthas.

 

The four pillars of human existence (per Sanātana Dharma) are --

1. Dharma
2. Artha
3. Kāma
4. Mōksha

 

The four āshramas are --

 

1. Brahmachārya (Student life/celibacy, study the dharma)
2. Grihasta (Householder/family, live the dharmic way)
3. vānahprastha (Forest dweller/retired to contemplate on the dharma)
4. Sanyāsa (Renunciate - attain liberation)

 

All actions must be done on the basis of Dharma, but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected. Not everyone is cut out for the renunciate's lifestyle at an early age. Normally the vairāgya that arises from going through the cycle of the four āshramas is a natural outcome of the human condition, and progressively *SHOULD* point the individual towards Self-realization. 

 

But that doesn't work anymore and always was an idealized, culture-specific way of life, in Hindu India. Yet, the concepts can be applied universally (and we see a similar approach naturally arising, at least till Grihastāshrama, in all cultures.

 

[3bob]

37 minutes ago, dwai said:

I think the Varnāshrama concept in Hindu dharma is very important to keep in mind. Also, the four purushārthas.

 

The four pillars of human existence (per Sanātana Dharma) are --

1. Dharma
2. Artha
3. Kāma
4. Mōksha

 

The four āshramas are --

 

1. Brahmachārya (Student life/celibacy, study the dharma)
2. Grihasta (Householder/family, live the dharmic way)
3. vānahprastha (Forest dweller/retired to contemplate on the dharma)
4. Sanyāsa (Renunciate - attain liberation)

 

All actions must be done on the basis of Dharma, but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected. Not everyone is cut out for the renunciate's lifestyle at an early age. Normally the vairāgya that arises from going through the cycle of the four āshramas is a natural outcome of the human condition, and progressively *SHOULD* point the individual towards Self-realization. 

 

But that doesn't work anymore and always was an idealized, culture-specific way of life, in Hindu India. Yet, the concepts can be applied universally (and we see a similar approach naturally arising, at least till Grihastāshrama, in all cultures.

 

 

Agreed that it (the Sanyasin way) doesn't work as well anymore because of the drastic changes to much of the  support system/culture and natural environment,  and  how same in the past gave less complications to the Sanyasin ways in Hindu/India. 

 

umm, I'm not sure how your following sentence below would apply to a Sanyasin under very strict vows and responsibilities? 
"but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected"   

 

 

 

[dwai]

13 minutes ago, 3bob said:

 

Agreed that it (the Sanyasin way) doesn't work as well anymore because of the drastic changes to much of the  support system/culture and natural environment,  and  how same in the past gave less complications to the Sanyasin ways in Hindu/India. 

 

umm, I'm not sure how your following sentence below would apply to a Sanyasin under very strict vows and responsibilities? 
"but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected"   

 

 

 

In the traditional system, the Sanyasi takes sanyasa after going through the first 3 āshramas. So, he/she has already experienced the first three purushārthas. 

 

Also, Sanyasa isn't particularly about strict vows and responsibilities, in as much as it is about giving up personal history. The Sanyasi will do his/her own last rites, which involves giving up of all ties to the world (including parents, family, possessions, etc). 

[3bob]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

In the traditional system, the Sanyasi takes sanyasa after going through the first 3 āshramas. So, he/she has already experienced the first three purushārthas. 

 

Also, Sanyasa isn't particularly about strict vows and responsibilities, in as much as it is about giving up personal history. The Sanyasi will do his/her own last rites, which involves giving up of all ties to the world (including parents, family, possessions, etc). 

 

ok,  but when you say, "So, he/she has already experienced the first three purushārthas" it is not the same as saying he has renounced those is it, even if the related process assumes he has?  Anyway and for clarity sake it seems we would have to circle  back to the logical contradiction of,  "but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected" for a Sanyasin ... (I mentioned vows and responsibilities in regards to whatever order that person may be part of and what they may require - which as you imply could vary  a lot besides the common denominator of,  "The Sanyasi will do his/her own last rites, which involves giving up of all ties to the world (including parents, family, possessions, etc". 

 

[dwai]

1 minute ago, 3bob said:

 

ok,  but when you say, "So, he/she has already experienced the first three purushārthas" it is not the same as saying he has renounced those is it, even if the related process assumes he has?  Anyway and for clarity sake it seems we would have to circle  back to the logical contradiction of,  "but none of the attainments *such as sensual or worldly* need to be rejected" for a Sanyasin ... (I mentioned vows and responsibilities in regards to whatever order that person may be part of and what they may require - which as you imply could vary  a lot besides the common denominator of,  "The Sanyasi will do his/her own last rites, which involves giving up of all ties to the world (including parents, family, possessions, etc". 

 

For someone who has never experienced, and yet "given up" something, there seems to be something amiss.  What did you have in the first place that you have given up? 

 

One (none of the attainments need to be given up) is from the point of view of "completeness of the human experience". 

The other (sanyasa) is after one has a complete human experience. 

 

It is not unusual to find someone living in a cave in the Himalayas and yet racked in the throes of passion and desire. 

It is also not unusual to find someone living amidst materialism of the highest degree and yet remaining untouched by it. 

 

True renunciation is of the mind. So long as one identifies with the contents of the mind, there cannot be renunciation. When one has ceased identifying with the contents of the mind, everything is an act of a renunciate. 

 

[doc benway]

8 hours ago, 3bob said:

 

well Steve  couldn't that become a slippery slope if dharma (as spiritual law) is adapted to fit lifestyles,  instead of truly being incorporated as the lead factor...many in the west have "incorporated' (so to speak) the hell out of things from A-Z.

 

What good is the most perfect Dharma if it cannot be brought into our lives, no matter what our profession or living circumstances?

For me, it is of no value as an abstraction.

I see it more as truth than law.

I do think it's a 2 way street, we must bring sincerity and devotion but we can't be afraid to integrate it in ways that work for us.

 

 

8 hours ago, 3bob said:

and regarding the "cushion",  what do you think of sitting next to a wall in silence for 9 years like Bohidharma is said or is recorded as having done?    

 

I personally don't take things too literally but I do look for lessons in such stories.

If someone feels compelled to retreat from the world, that is their prerogative and their karma.

It is what they need at that moment in their lives and I respect that.

If another chooses to make Dharma a part of their secular life, that is equally legitimate and I respect that the same.

The important thing is that we look at ourselves with openness and clarity and do what is in our hearts.

 

 

[3bob]

22 minutes ago, steve said:

 

What good is the most perfect Dharma if it cannot be brought into our lives, no matter what our profession or living circumstances?

For me, it is of no value as an abstraction.

I see it more as truth than law.

I do think it's a 2 way street, we must bring sincerity and devotion but we can't be afraid to integrate it in ways that work for us.

 

 

 

I personally don't take things too literally but I do look for lessons in such stories.

If someone feels compelled to retreat from the world, that is their prerogative and their karma.

It is what they need at that moment in their lives and I respect that.

If another chooses to make Dharma a part of their secular life, that is equally legitimate and I respect that the same.

The important thing is that we look at ourselves with openness and clarity and do what is in our hearts.

 

 

 

sounds cool and even handed like you often demonstrate,  although I'd add that spiritual truths and laws can not be separated...

[Bindi]

8 hours ago, dwai said:

For someone who has never experienced, and yet "given up" something, there seems to be something amiss.  What did you have in the first place that you have given up? 

 

One (none of the attainments need to be given up) is from the point of view of "completeness of the human experience". 

The other (sanyasa) is after one has a complete human experience. 

 

It is not unusual to find someone living in a cave in the Himalayas and yet racked in the throes of passion and desire. 

It is also not unusual to find someone living amidst materialism of the highest degree and yet remaining untouched by it. 

 

True renunciation is of the mind. So long as one identifies with the contents of the mind, there cannot be renunciation. When one has ceased identifying with the contents of the mind, everything is an act of a renunciate. 

 

 

This to me is what you are trying to not identify with.

 

 

Quote

 

Mental - Manamaya kosha 

The next of the koshas is Manamaya kosha. Mana means mind. It is the level of processing thoughts and emotions. It is in direct control of the operation, through the prana, of the physical body and senses. It is like a supervisor in a factory, in that it gives instructions, but is not supposed to be the manager of the factory of life. Because of this, it naturally has doubts, and created illusions. When it receives clear instructions from the deeper level, it functions quite well. However, when it is clouded over by its illusions, the deeper wisdom is clouded over.

After taking care of the physical body and training the energy flow of prana, the most important part to be trained in positive ways is this level of mind. In meditation, we become aware of Manamaya kosha, explore it, and then go inward, to and through the remaining koshas.

http://www.swamij.com/koshas.htm

 

 

 

I understand this kosha as the equivalent of yin and yang. There are deeper or higher levels, but this 3rd level still exists, and works perfectly well when it is properly examined and understood. In fact this level working properly is the basis as I understand it in starting the real work on the 4th kosha.

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2018 by Bindi

[Apech]

53 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

This to me is what you are trying to not identify with.

 

 

 

 

I understand this kosha as the equivalent of yin and yang. There are deeper or higher levels, but this 3rd level still exists, and works perfectly well when it is properly examined and understood. In fact this level working properly is the basis as I understand it in starting the real work on the 4th kosha.

 

 

 

 

 

In what way is manas equivalent to yin/yang?

[Bindi]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

 

In what way is manas equivalent to yin/yang?

 

I always viewed male as mental/mind and female as emotions, because this is how my dreams described these forces, and I have spent my time (decades) teasing apart and understanding and healing only these two aspects within myself.

 

At a certain stage (in the UDT) the male/female differentiation evolved into something remarkably similar to the white Yang (male) and Black Yin (female) qualities that seem to be encapsulated in Daoism's taijitu. These seem to be the better and more specific terms to understand the dynamics in the UDT. Still male/female, but with white/black added, and certain clear characteristics. 

 

Yang 'gives instructions', but Yin listens and is the force that can carry out Yangs instructions. This is when they manage to unite and cooperate. I think they are looking after all human functions, and are the level that is affected by karma and conditioning. Even united there is still a process to finish sorting the mental/emotional level out. Beyond this level there seems to be 'True Yin' and 'True Yang', they seem to be more related to the 4th kosha, and to beyond normal 'earth' functions, more wise and compassionate than the fundamental yin/yang.

 

 

 

[Apech]

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

I always viewed male as mental/mind and female as emotions, because this is how my dreams described these forces, and I have spent my time (decades) teasing apart and understanding and healing only these two aspects within myself.

 

At a certain stage (in the UDT) the male/female differentiation evolved into something remarkably similar to the white Yang (male) and Black Yin (female) qualities that seem to be encapsulated in Daoism's taijitu. These seem to be the better and more specific terms to understand the dynamics in the UDT. Still male/female, but with white/black added, and certain clear characteristics. 

 

Yang 'gives instructions', but Yin listens and is the force that can carry out Yangs instructions. This is when they manage to unite and cooperate. I think they are looking after all human functions, and are the level that is affected by karma and conditioning. Even united there is still a process to finish sorting the mental/emotional level out. Beyond this level there seems to be 'True Yin' and 'True Yang', they seem to be more related to the 4th kosha, and to beyond normal 'earth' functions, more wise and compassionate than the fundamental yin/yang.

 

 

 

 

 

I kind of get what you are saying but I think you are conflating this kosha idea with yinyang and I'm not sure why.  Yinyang are more fundamental than mental/emotional and manas is not particularly polarised in this way anyway but refers to the mind which sits behind sense perception and thought as a kind of 'self' as far as I understand it.

[Bindi]

3 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

I kind of get what you are saying but I think you are conflating this kosha idea with yinyang and I'm not sure why.  Yinyang are more fundamental than mental/emotional and manas is not particularly polarised in this way anyway but refers to the mind which sits behind sense perception and thought as a kind of 'self' as far as I understand it.

 

I'm happy to agree yin and yang are more fundamental than mental/emotional, but this level is the first place that yin/yang shows up for me that I can consciously and actively scrutinise and understand within myself and positively affect, so maybe it's just the first iteration that I am personally interested in engaging in. 

 

Manas can be polarised as mental/emotional, swami j refers to it in these terms and I generally like his portrayal of these things. 

[dwai]

Manas is the field/stream of thoughts, emotions and feelings. So in it, there are both yin and yang.

 

Yet compared to the body mind is more insubstantial. Compared to energy the mind is more substantial. And so on...

 

yin-yang is a meta-physical principle. You can find it in anything.

 

 

[3bob]

one might look at the 25 or 36 tattvas (depending on the school) along this line... 

[doc benway]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

Manas is the field/stream of thoughts, emotions and feelings. So in it, there are both yin and yang.

 

Yet compared to the body mind is more insubstantial. Compared to energy the mind is more substantial. And so on...

 

yin-yang is a meta-physical principle. You can find it in anything.

 

 

 

What makes mind more substantial than energy?

[dwai]

10 minutes ago, steve said:

 

What makes mind more substantial than energy?

It seems that mind (thinking mind) is "heavier" than energy and we use in our style of tai chi to counterbalance the energy.  Also our everyday experience says that we can experience our mind (thoughts, emotions, feelings) far more palpably than we can energy (ie speaking from a lay person's point of view).