interrupted meditation session

[Jeff]

22 minutes ago, dwai said:

This is an old discussion between us  

 

The transactional world activities are predicated on a combination of four processes that arise in and from awareness. 

 

• Manas - The stream of thoughts is the mind
• Ahamkara - Identification of self with body-mind apparatus
• Buddhi - intellect (capability of thought generation)
• Chitta - storehouse of impressions and memories

The act of opening or closing our eyes are predicated on the functioning of a combination of these four processes.  At the end of the day, every activity only happens in awareness. 

 

Got it.  Thanks.  To me all of it would be an aspect of mind.  

[dwai]

21 minutes ago, s1va said:

 

That sounds close to the definition of Shiva in KS. But I don't see anything about Emptiness in that.

 

From Shiva Sutras --

 

Quote

15. hṛidaye cittasaṁghaṭṭād dṛiśyasvāpadarśanam // When his thoughts are diverted to the center of God consciousness, then he feels the existence of God consciousness in oneness in the objective world and in the world of negation.

 

The literal reading is “When all one’s thoughts are diverted to the heart.” Here the word heart (hṛidaye) does not mean our own physical heart. Rather, here the word “heart” means the light of consciousness (cit prakāśa) which is the background, the basis, of the existence of the whole universe. On that basis, everything in this universe is moving, being born, dying, suffering, enjoying, smiling, laughing, marrying, etc. Everything has that center of God consciousness as its basis. This yogī experiences the oneness of the existence of God consciousness in the objective world and in the world of negation. When does the experience of the negation of the objective world occur? The experience of the negation of the objective world takes place at the time of death and at the time of deep sleep. And, in these states also, the yogī effortlessly experiences the existence of God consciousness. How? The yogī accomplishes this by collecting his mind and putting it on that point. Although the mind is always flickering and does not exist in one point, through the practice (sādhanā) of one-pointedness, it becomes easy for the yogī to maintain one point. He then discards the differentiation of objectivity and subjectivity and perceives the objective world, which consists not only of external objects but also of his body of wakefulness, his body of the dreaming state, and his body of the dreamless state (nīla-deha-prāṇa-buddhyātmanaḥ), and the negation of these, which is the void state (śūnya), in its real way as the limbs of his universal body. When you make your mind enter into the light of consciousness then your mind feels this whole universe as one with that universal being.

 

Lakshmanjoo, Swami. Shiva Sutras: The Supreme Awakening

 

 

[Jonesboy]

34 minutes ago, dwai said:

The One is essentially the arising of the sense of "I" in awareness imho.  

So in a way, One is Pure Awareness presenting itself to itself with a sense of self-awareness. As it arises,  through various mechanisms (as posited by various theories about creation - like the five coverings aka pancha kanchukas, etc) it veils itself and a universe of subject and objects is created. 

 

 

So the One is the "I" like in Dwai?

 

Brahman is emptiness which is awareness of awareness? That which is beyond the "I" aka Dwai?

[dwai]

47 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

So the One is the "I" like in Dwai?

It is the "I" like in the appearance of self-awareness without any identities. It is also called the "aham-sphurana" or "I-I" or "I am". The identification as Tom or Dwai or Siva or Jeff gets superimposed upon the primordial "I" due to the mechanism of veiling. 

47 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

Brahman is emptiness which is awareness of awareness? That which is beyond the "I" aka Dwai?

Brahman is the awareness (light) that is reflected in the "I". Or rather, the "I" too is a process that arises and disappears in awareness. It is not separate from awareness, but is made up of awareness. 

Edited November 7, 2018 by dwai

[Cheshire Cat]

One is essentially the arising of the awareness of the sense of "I" in awareness.  

So, One is the awareness of presenting itself to the process of the arising of awareness with a sense of self-awareness. As it arises,  through various mechanisms, it veils the awareness of itself and in the awareness of this process, subject and object are self-created. Quantumly.

 

This philosophy is Cheshire Cats' bussness

 

Here's a photo of me teaching Advaita Vedanta to a student of mine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonesboy]

24 minutes ago, dwai said:

It is the "I" like in the appearance of self-awareness without any identities. It is also called the "aham-sphurana" or "I-I" or "I am". The identification as Tom or Dwai or Siva or Jeff gets superimposed upon the primordial "I" due to the mechanism of veiling. 

 

Thank you dwai but that didn't answer my question

 

Let me ask it a different way.

 

Is the One both emptiness and awareness at the same time? No difference?

[dwai]

5 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Thank you dwai but that didn't answer my question

 

Let me ask it a different way.

 

Is the One both emptiness and awareness at the same time? No difference?

In the causal state, One is emptiness full of potentiality. In the subtle state, this potentiality manifests in the form of subtle forms (ideas). In the gross state, it manifests as the physical universe and all its content.  It is all happening in awareness, using the "light" of awareness (of Brahman or Shiva).

In other words, Emptiness and Form both appear and disappear in Brahman/Shiva. But Brahman/Shiva is neither emptiness nor form; as well as is both emptiness and form. 

 

 

Edited November 7, 2018 by dwai

[Jonesboy]

1 minute ago, dwai said:

In the causal state, One is emptiness full of potentiality. In the subtle state, this potentiality manifests in the form of subtle forms (ideas). In the gross state, it manifests as the physical universe and all its content.  It is all happening in awareness, using the "light" of awareness (of Brahman or Shiva). 

 

Thank you,

 

You do know that is a unique view don't you?

 

In AV what manifests and what is a physical universe?

 

Also, can you provide me a reference to the causal body being emptiness and full of potentiality? The closest I have found is this.

 

 Siddharameshwar Maharaj, the guru of Nisargadatta Maharaj, also describes the causal body as characterized by "emptiness", "ignorance" and "darkness".^[3] In the search for the "I am", this is a state where there is nothing to hold on to anymore.

 

That doesn't sound like Buddhist emptiness like you are using.. More sounds like moving beyond the local "I".

 

As described here..

 

The Indian tradition identifies it with the Anandamaya kosha,^{[web 1]} and the deep sleep state, as mentioned in the Mandukya Upanishad, where buddhi becomes dormant and all concepts of time fail.

[Zen Pig]

Oh, no we are back to discussing "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin", like the scholars did in the middle ages. 

 

Not trying to throw stones in my glass house, because I went through the whole thing myself.  I found that I ended up chasing my own tail.  I saw that all I could do is sit, and let go,  and really look. drop all ideas, drop all the desire to tell someone, "what is true, real, right, and what is wrong".. I found that I had to really focus on the path in front of me, and not get side tracked into talking it to death, or changing someone else's mind,  but that is just my experience,  what the hell do i know, ?(mostly I don't know shit),,, hell, maybe it can all be talked out.  who knows? I suppose it might work....... and maybe.....

Marlin Monroe will knock on my door in a few seconds and want to give me a back rub?   LOL 

Edited November 7, 2018 by Zen Pig

[dwai]

1 minute ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Thank you,

 

You do know that is a unique view don't you?

Not sure what you mean. That is the view of Advaita Vedanta, and as I'm learning more and more, Kashmir Shaivism too. It is how I've learnt Daoism as well. 

1 minute ago, Jonesboy said:

 

In AV what manifests and what is a physical universe?

In AV, what manifests is a product of awareness. Physical universe is a manifestation of awareness through the process of veiling. 

1 minute ago, Jonesboy said:

Also, can you provide me a reference to the causal body being emptiness and full of potentiality? The closest I have found is this.

 

 Siddharameshwar Maharaj, the guru of Nisargadatta Maharaj, also describes the causal body as characterized by "emptiness", "ignorance" and "darkness".^[3] In the search for the "I am", this is a state where there is nothing to hold on to anymore.

 

That doesn't sound like Buddhist emptiness like you are using.. More sounds like moving beyond the local "I".

 

As described here..

Read Gaudapāda's Māńdukya Kārikās. This topic is covered in great detail there (first section of this text is the Mańdukya upanishad). 

1 minute ago, Jonesboy said:

 

The Indian tradition identifies it with the Anandamaya kosha,^{[web 1]} and the deep sleep state, as mentioned in the Mandukya Upanishad, where buddhi becomes dormant and all concepts of time fail.

It also identifies it with Ishwara - God.  

[s1va]

16 minutes ago, dwai said:

Read Gaudapāda's Māńdukya Kārikās. This topic is covered in great detail there (first section of this text is the Mańdukya upanishad). 

 

I have read Gaudapada's Mandukya Karikas.  Don't recall anything about emptiness from there.  If I recall, it is all opposed to the concept of void or emptiness.

[Jonesboy]

7 minutes ago, dwai said:

Not sure what you mean. That is the view of Advaita Vedanta, and as I'm learning more and more, Kashmir Shaivism too. It is how I've learnt Daoism as well. 

In AV, what manifests is a product of awareness. Physical universe is a manifestation of awareness through the process of veiling. 

Read Gaudapāda's Māńdukya Kārikās. This topic is covered in great detail there (first section of this text is the Mańdukya upanishad). 

It also identifies it with Ishwara - God.  

 

Thank you my friend but you still are not answering my questions.

 

KS does not believe in emptiness like Buddhism.

 

I thought the Physical Universe was an illusion in AV.. now it is real just like in KS?

 

Thank you, I looked up the Mańdukya Upanishad and I see nothing on emptiness or potential as is being discussed here. Maybe I missed it and you can point it out.

 

This is the closest I got.

 

Prapancopaśamam: Here all samsāra, all this tumult of

creation, subsides, like waves sinking into the ocean, as

dream is withdrawn into waking consciousness. The

universe, in all its conditions – gross, subtle and causal –

ceases here. In this state, there is neither the Virāt, nor

Hiraṇyagarbha, nor Īsvara; because, there is no creation.

This is the Ātman where there is neither waking, nor

dreaming, nor sleep. Thus, it is called prapancopaśamam.

It is not a condition; it is beyond all conditions. It is not a

state of affairs. We do not know what it is. It is a mystery.

Wonder of all wonders is this: Wonderful is that disciple

who can comprehend it from the wonderful teacher who

can teach this wonderful Being. Āścaryavat paśyati, vadati,

ṣrinoti, says the Kaṭha Upanishad. What a glorious Being is

it! The prapanca, this vast cosmos, ceases there, and That

alone is, shining as the glorious Sun of all suns. It is śāntam:

Peaceful is that state. No worries, no anxieties, no pains, no

sufferings, no births and deaths, no agonies of any kind can

be there. It is not the peace born of the absence of sound or

the absence of contact with things. It is the peace which is

positive in its nature. We say we are peaceful when nobody

talks to us, none disturbs us, and we have everything that

we want. This is not the peace of the Ātman, because our

concept of peace in the world is purely negative and, again,

relational. The Ātman is non-relational peace that cannot

be put an end to by the passage of time.

[s1va]

Also, I want to point out the Gaudapada's Karikas were written approximately at the time of Adi Shankara (Well after the time of Buddha).  The actual Mandukya Upanishad is very short, concise and precise.  Elaborate expansion happened with this Karika, some ideas were modified and given new meaning, nothing really wrong in this.  When we take something very small like few verses at most, and write a very large explanation for that like a book, obviously many new thoughts are going to be introduced.  This Karika is also a total AV interpretation of the said Upanishad.  There are other interpretations that exist and explain this Upanishad in a different light entirely.

[dwai]

32 minutes ago, s1va said:

Also, I want to point out the Gaudapada's Karikas were written approximately at the time of Adi Shankara (Well after the time of Buddha).  The actual Mandukya Upanishad is very short, concise and precise.  Elaborate expansion happened with this Karika, some ideas were modified and given new meaning, nothing really wrong in this.  When we take something very small like few verses at most, and write a very large explanation for that like a book, obviously many new thoughts are going to be introduced.  This Karika is also a total AV interpretation of the said Upanishad.  There are other interpretations that exist and explain this Upanishad in a different light entirely.

Agreed on Karika being an AV perspective.  

Gaudapāda was Shankara's paramguru, so teacher's teacher. So at least a couple of generations before Shankara. 

[s1va]

1 minute ago, dwai said:

Agreed on Karika being an AV perspective.  

Gaudapāda was Shankara's paramguru, so teacher's teacher. So at least a couple of generations before Shankara. 

 

Yes, I would think their times are very close or overlapping considering the short lifespan of Shankara.  Govinda Bhagavadpada was Shankara's guru and  his teacher was Gaudapada Bhagavadpada, if I recall right.

 

Some say, Adi Shankara wrote  the poetic Bhaja Govindam verses to honor his Guru (Govinda) primarily and it is not referring to Krishna.  That could very well be true.  He might be singing the praise of Gurus in general and asking everyone to take refuge with the teacher.

[dwai]

38 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Thank you my friend but you still are not answering my questions.

 

KS does not believe in emptiness like Buddhism.

 

I thought the Physical Universe was an illusion in AV.. now it is real just like in KS?

I already explained to you what "real and unreal" mean in AV. Real is that which has independent Self-nature. Unreal is that which does not. So the physical universe is called unreal. No one denies its empirical reality. That's why there are two levels of reality per AV. The absolute level from the perspective of Brahman and the transactional level in which the material universe exists. 

 

Emptiness is a concept in Buddhism that deals with the same thing that makes AV label something as "unreal". The lack of independent Self-nature. The term Śūnya comes from the concept of svabhāva šūnya (of empty of Self-nature). That is the basis of emptiness in Buddhism. 

38 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

Thank you, I looked up the Mańdukya Upanishad and I see nothing on emptiness or potential as is being discussed here. Maybe I missed it and you can point it out.

It is more about understanding

 

[Jonesboy]

17 minutes ago, dwai said:

I already explained to you what "real and unreal" mean in AV. Real is that which has independent Self-nature. Unreal is that which does not. So the physical universe is called unreal. No one denies its empirical reality. That's why there are two levels of reality per AV. The absolute level from the perspective of Brahman and the transactional level in which the material universe exists. 

 

Emptiness is a concept in Buddhism that deals with the same thing that makes AV label something as "unreal". The lack of independent Self-nature. The term Śūnya comes from the concept of svabhāva šūnya (of empty of Self-nature). That is the basis of emptiness in Buddhism. 

It is more about understanding

 

 

Sunya does not mean emptiness in KS. Sunya is often used to describe deep sleep which is far from the goal in KS.

 

Sunyata in Buddhism is different than the term Sunya in KS.

 

Independent self nature is the basics of emptiness. Like saying there is no fire without wood and air. More like an intellectual understanding.

 

Thank you for the conversation dwai, clearly our understandings are different and no reason to rehash old talks that go nowhere.

 

All the best.

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Sunya does not mean emptiness in KS. Sunya is often used to describe deep sleep which is far from the goal in KS.

Sunya means zero...void...empty...nada. It doesn't have any different meaning. It is a Sanskrit word that is also used in exactly the same way in all indian languages. 

1 hour ago, Jonesboy said:

Sunyata in Buddhism is different than the term Sunya in KS.

 

Independent self nature is the basics of emptiness. Like saying there is no fire without wood and air. More like an intellectual understanding.

Okay you win. Your emptiness is real...mine is just intellectual  

1 hour ago, Jonesboy said:

Thank you for the conversation dwai, clearly our understandings are different and no reason to rehash old talks that go nowhere.

 

All the best.

Lets all apologize to @Edward M for derailing his OP. I am sorry...please forgive me

Edited November 7, 2018 by dwai

[Marblehead]

No apology from me.  All I'm doing is reading the thread.

 

[thelerner]

22 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

And down the rabbit hole we go...

 

So you are saying that you can witness something without a "mind"?  That you can perceive things without a mind?  If so, I would appreciate an example.

Without study or much relevance, my fingers give me this.  My metaphor is thinking mind (that assumes its Me), a witness that watches it, like a critic (often judging) and then a wider audience that watches dispassionately and doesn't give much of a damn.

Edited November 7, 2018 by thelerner

[joeblast]

On 11/5/2018 at 7:32 AM, Edward M said:

Thanks Marblehead, makes sense apart from that I can't stop saying them out loud.  

 

I hope you are right, time will tell.  

 

Thanks,

Edward 

Its even more simple than that.

 

As soon as you notice that you arent meditating/performing breathwork, STOP and IMMEDIATELY return to protocol.  Forget about whatever the hell it even was that you were about to muse about, it doesnt matter.  You dont even need to tell it to fuck off.  You dont need to try and create a 180 out of phase waveform for every waveform going on in your bodymind - just unplug as many portions as you can without harming yourself!  (=Turn the volume knob down until it is in the 0 position!  This is exactly what you're doing for breathwork on all nonessential body parts.  Extend that to mind!  The refocus is proprioception!)

 

Thoughts really arent going to stop until the neural conditioning is achieved, it is that simple.  If you "let thoughts be" and let them exist and do their thing until their energy naturally wanes, then you really are doing little towards actually attacking the root cause of the problem you are trying to solve.  You are not refocusing the base energy, you are not resolving the energy remainder and absorbing it into a more efficient process-paradigm, you are just letting the pattern continue as it may.

 

In order to achieve the neural conditioning, repeat breath protocol, regulate until auto-regulation is achieved = "real" regulation, where the subconscious has been properly programmed.

 

Then "real" "meditation" happens every single session.

 

Keep it that simple, sustain the efforts - and it is impossible to fail.

Edited November 7, 2018 by joeblast

[s1va]

37 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

No apology from me.  All I'm doing is reading the thread.

 

 

You were reading until this post. 

[dwai]

Just now, EmeraldHead said:

tao is beyond cause

Yes it is!

[Marblehead]

11 hours ago, EmeraldHead said:

tao is beyond cause

But not beyond effect.

 

Work that one out regarding "cause and effect" if you can.

 

[Marblehead]

1 minute ago, EmeraldHead said:

You keep saying 4. It's 5

Can we call it 4 and understand it to be 5?