Xing and Ming cultivation

[dwai]

15 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

When people negate emotions, this is the essence of negating the ‘earth’, negating yin, and spiritual bypassing. 
 

A spiritual bypass or spiritual bypassing is a "tendency to use spiritual ideas and practices to sidestep or avoid facing unresolved emotional issues, psychological wounds, and unfinished developmental tasks". 

 

Emotional issues are painful, opening up the emotional channel is hard work, easier to just see all emotions as unreal, and justify it as advanced spirituality. 

 

 

Who said anything about bypassing?  

 

Witness and let go. The Non-clinging/non-avoiding mind is the free mind. Whatever comes will come, whatever goes will go. 

[freeform]

14 hours ago, Miffymog said:

Sorry Freeform but, due to my past experiences I’m tending towards Dwai’s point of view rather than yours...

Well Miffy - you’re definitely off my Christmas card list now!!

 

Only joking

 

I don’t have one!

 

8 hours ago, Yueya said:

although my path is also an alchemical one, it’s runs a markedly different course from yours.

You’re off the list too!! 

 

In all seriousness - I think I need to apologise for hijacking the thread. By no means am I suggesting it’s my way or the highway!
 

Even within alchemical Daoism there are many different schools with very different ways of doing things.

 

And although I’m debating Dwai, I have the highest respect for him, and for the Vedic teachings - as I believe they are the oldest recorded source of meditative training we humans have.

 

In the end it doesn’t really matter. We’re all on a spiritual path - and whether we complete the path in a few decades or in a few thousand lifetimes - it doesn’t really matter! And completing the path, I’m told, is just the start of another one... So what’s the difference. I think being a kind person in unfavourable circumstances is one of the most powerful things we can do. The spiritual stuff is just icing on the cake

 

What compelled me to write on this thread is from a couple of private discussions here.

 

I feel more fortunate than all the lottery winners combined - to come across my teachers and this process. To be part of this path - after encountering so many dead ends, delusions and unsavoury characters - to find my teachers and be taught this - is the greatest gift I could ask for in any thousands of lifetimes. 
 

So my sharing this stuff here and trying to be as clear as I can is simply an attempt to share the tiniest part of this gift that I can. I realise that it’s sometimes a little grating and severe - but I rather not dumb things down - and be authentic to the flavour of the teachings as I receive them.

 

So I’d love to hear other people’s understanding of Xing-Ming practice. I promise not to write ridiculously long-winded posts anymore 😄

[freeform]

8 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Really?  Because this doesn´t sound remotely positive.  I know I don´t need to worry about this now -- and likely never -- but if this is where the bus is heading, let me off now. 

Ok - just one more 

 

No - not positive at all... not negative either - just dull

 

The bus does progress past this stage.
 

But I always warn people that spiritual cultivation is not what it seems. It’s not easy, not pleasant and a foolhardy endeavour. So consider me a fool! 

[senseless virtue]

1 hour ago, freeform said:

But I always warn people that spiritual cultivation is not what it seems. It’s not easy, not pleasant and a foolhardy endeavour. So consider me a fool! 

This +1,000,000 times.

 

My own early misconception about spirituality was that there would be much more bliss and pleasant experiences. I was half expecting that someone to greet me with "Welcome to Disney World! Would you want some cotton candy?" and it would be a smooth ride thereafter.

 

Then the reality hit that it was going to be a journey through the gate that says Arbeit Macht Frei ("Work Liberates") and facing horrors that one has concentrated inside it.

 

Spoiler

 

The horror! The horror!

 

Edited February 26, 2020 by virtue

[Chainer]

31 minutes ago, freeform said:

But I always warn people that spiritual cultivation is not what it seems. It’s not easy, not pleasant and a foolhardy endeavour. So consider me a fool! 

 

Wise words indeed, no idea why you have decided to apologise for this all of sudden, perhaps some miss placed social conscious or fear of isolation. Surely giving in to that crap is 'beneath' you now, in the sense of your lower self at least.  

 

In retrospect, the spiritual process reminds me more of some x rated version of Jungs Individuation process now, 1 big stand up fight to the death. With yourself.   

 

Always find it interesting how people are put off by the truth, how they react... like it's almost the ultimate test, think there maybe a saying but I forget.

[freeform]

45 minutes ago, Chainer said:

no idea why you have decided to apologise for this all of sudden, perhaps some miss placed social conscious or fear of isolation. Surely giving in to that crap is 'beneath' you now, in the sense of your lower self at least. 

 

No no - nothing like that. I love isolation!

 

I just realised that by being so vocal and strong in my stance, I've probably alienated people and made it hard for them to share their perspective.

 

That's the only thing I'm apologising for.

 

Everyone deserves a voice and the ability to share it. I might well think someone's perspective is deluded or whatever - but the person behind the perspective deserves respect and a space to share openly.

 

I'm certainly not apologising about my views or my sometimes stern attitude. I don't apologise for saying things are wrong, or incomplete etc. People are to be respected - but their views, thoughts and positions are straw dogs in my opinion. I certainly don't take disagreement personally - and hope others don't either

 

1 hour ago, Chainer said:

Always find it interesting how people are put off by the truth, how they react... like it's almost the ultimate test, think there maybe a saying but I forget.

 

We live in a 'Humanist' religious environment (whether we know it or not). The main tenet of Humanism is "how I (as a human) feel is the truth". As opposed to the old religious stance which was "what God says is the truth"...

 

Although it's probably healthier to some extent to have the locus of control within, than in some outside perspective (as represented by some priest or something)...

 

But more and more it becomes clear that 'how I feel' is fraught with all manner of conditioned biases. Truth is hard-won - and it's not based on just how I feel - and it's not what the priest says either. It can only be discovered through insight - which takes a lot of work.

[dwai]

6 hours ago, freeform said:

Ok - just one more 

 

No - not positive at all... not negative either - just dull

 

The bus does progress past this stage.

 

6 hours ago, freeform said:

 

But I always warn people that spiritual cultivation is not what it seems. It’s not easy, not pleasant and a foolhardy endeavour. So consider me a fool! 

one day while listening to John McLaughlin’s Shakti I was moved to tears at the beauty and wonder of the music. Along with that I felt a deep outpouring of love for my teacher and the divine. 
 

 Being that I was spending almost all my waking moments in contemplation back then, a thought ran through my mind immediately  — “so then I have to give up this and other experiences of beauty, as individual experience will disappear after ‘waking up’!” 
“All joy will cease to be experienced, because in awakening all perturbations of the mind disappear — after all the mind dies!”, the voice in my head said.

 

So that put me in a bit of a quandary.  Would I have to give up experiencing love and joy and the exquisite anguish of music that moves me to tears with its beauty? 

[liminal_luke]

44 minutes ago, dwai said:

 

 Would I have to give up experiencing love and joy and the exquisite anguish of music that moves me to tears with its beauty? 

 

And how did you answer the question?

[dwai]

11 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

And how did you answer the question?

There is no experience apart from True Nature (or consciousness). Joy is not experienced due to an external object. Love is not experienced due to an external object. They are part of True Nature. That was a logical inference at that point. 

 

Also later, it became apparent that the "no mind" state is not one of a dead mind. There is a technical term in sanskrit for it -- "mano nāsha" (Destruction of the mind). This is a source of great confusion for seekers on this path (as it was for me as well), as they think that the mind will cease to function .  That is not the case. The "destruction" of the mind occurs when it becomes apparent that it is merely a tool -- an instrument via which experiencing occurs.

'No mind' is a condition in which the mind doesn't grasp at/for things any more. Whatever comes, comes; whatever goes, goes. 

So of course, there is experience..but there is no grasping for it anymore. There is no craving...there is no repulsion. 

[dawei]

I binge-read the entire thread... really great discussion and topic

 

2 hours ago, dwai said:

There is no experience apart from True Nature (or consciousness). Joy is not experienced due to an external object. Love is not experienced due to an external object. They are part of True Nature. That was a logical inference at that point. 

 

To be fair, IMO, there is no experience apart from external objects else we would not be experiencing living... but I do get your point, which I think is: There is an intrinsic aspect, else these experiences cannot exist. 

 

Quote

Also later, it became apparent that the "no mind" state is not one of a dead mind. There is a technical term in sanskrit for it -- "mano nāsha" (Destruction of the mind). This is a source of great confusion for seekers on this path (as it was for me as well), as they think that the mind will cease to function .  That is not the case. The "destruction" of the mind occurs when it becomes apparent that it is merely a tool -- an instrument via which experiencing occurs.

'No mind' is a condition in which the mind doesn't grasp at/for things any more. Whatever comes, comes; whatever goes, goes. 

So of course, there is experience..but there is no grasping for it anymore. There is no craving...there is no repulsion. 

 

I'm more familiar with reading about no-mind with Zen but it seems similar... that there is no deliberate (nor deliberating) mind, it is more flowing with, what is.     

Edited February 26, 2020 by dawei

[freeform]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

“All joy will cease to be experienced, because in awakening all perturbations of the mind disappear — after all the mind dies!”, the voice in my head said.

 

No - it's a temporary stage as the change slowly becomes more stable.

 

At a later stage, emotions do return - albeit in a very different form.

 

I'm certainly not at that stage, but from what a senior student describes - emotions become less reactive and less all-encompassing - they become like subtle states. Yes, there is love and 'appreciative joy' - but it doesn't work in the same way as normal - less personal, less directional and not based on stimulus-response feedback in the same way.

 

From what I understand one would not burst into tears from hearing a beautiful song.

 

Most lay-practitioners stop the transformation process at stage 4 (the one after the emotionless stage) - because to move ahead in the process you would need to retreat from society for a prolonged time and spend years in constant meditation. This is when body processes stop and you enter a kind of meditative stasis. You need people around to look after your body... or you need to be entombed in some way.

[dwai]

12 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

No - it's a temporary stage as the change slowly becomes more stable.

 

At a later stage, emotions do return - albeit in a very different form.

 

I'm certainly not at that stage, but from what a senior student describes - emotions become less reactive and less all-encompassing - they become like subtle states. Yes, there is love and 'appreciative joy' - but it doesn't work in the same way as normal - less personal, less directional and not based on stimulus-response feedback in the same way.

Yes. 

12 minutes ago, freeform said:

From what I understand one would not burst into tears from hearing a beautiful song.

True  

12 minutes ago, freeform said:

Most lay-practitioners stop the transformation process at stage 4 (the one after the emotionless stage) - because to move ahead in the process you would need to retreat from society for a prolonged time and spend years in constant meditation. This is when body processes stop and you enter a kind of meditative stasis. You need people around to look after your body... or you need to be entombed in some way.

That is not my understanding. That is needed when we enter what is called "kevala nirvikalpa samadhi" -- total cessation of the mind for extended periods of time. It is erroneously considered a "higher" state. It is not so -- it only results in what is called "mano laya" (or submersion of the mind). The beyond of that stage is the beginning of enlightenment -- the non-grasping mind -- it is called "sahaja samādhi" in the Indian traditions (both Vedanta as well as Tantra). 

 

If you so feel inclined, you should do a reading of the book "Tripura Rahasya" -- it clearly outlines the different phases, stages, etc etc. Admittedly not a Daoist book per se, but I think you'll see the similarities therein.

[liminal_luke]

If spiritual development leads to a place where all feeling is either non-existent or blunted to the point where it´s a "subtle state" what´s the point?  What is "spiritual" about such a state?  Why would someone want that?  Equanimity is great but when it slides into simply not caring, I´m not so sure.  I wouldn´t my loved ones to become enlightened if that would mean they´d lose the ability to take an interest in me and my activities.  

 

I´ve always thought that spirituality should make a person care more, not less.  Have I got it wrong all these years?  

[dwai]

5 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

If spiritual development leads to a place where all feeling is either non-existent or blunted to the point where it´s a "subtle state" what´s the point?  What is "spiritual" about such a state?  Why would someone want that?  Equanimity is great but when it slides into simply not caring, I´m not so sure.  I wouldn´t my loved ones to become enlightened if that would mean they´d lose the ability to take an interest in me and my activities.  

Unaffected is a better word. And because the sense of Self has expanded to include the whole world, a different kind of love and compassion exudes from such a person. Then the person is able to help uplift those in need, and be of service to others without any sense or expectation of getting anything in return. So some will re-enter the world with pure love and spirit of service. 

Of course, some simply spend out their remaining physical lifespan as hermits. Nothing wrong with that either. 

5 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I´ve always thought that spirituality should make a person care more, not less.  Have I got it wrong all these years?  

No you haven't. But that 'care more', imho is out of the expansion of one's sense of Being from beyond the body-mind-personality to the entire universe.  But some might simply choose to disappear. Unaffected, but never indifference, imho.

[Geof Nanto]

Many good comments here.  

 

17 hours ago, freeform said:

But I always warn people that spiritual cultivation is not what it seems. It’s not easy, not pleasant and a foolhardy endeavour. So consider me a fool! 

 

Yeah, but......

 

For me deeper down, I only do this because, all thing considered, it's the easiest path for me. That's how Dao works, why it's sometimes referred to as the watercourse way. Mine has been a path of following my desires, of doing what I felt like, and then dealing with the consequences. Initially these consequences were almost entirely unpleasant. But slowly through an alchemical process of refinement using the whole of life as a cauldron, my desires have slowly transmuted into something far more harmonious with Dao.

 

This could also be called a path of following one's heart. And sure, I am forced to gain insight into rotten aspects of my heart. No way is this pleasant! Yet it's still the easiest thing for me to do because not dealing with it feels like stagnation and a slow death of my heart, of my soul. That's what happens with ming-xing cultivation. My alignment with Dao strengthens and I'm compelled to act accordingly because I gain a glimpse of an awe inspiring deeper reality.   Sure it can be difficult, but it's meaningful difficulty. And always it's about finding the easiest way through. Through a long process of inner exploration, of trial and error, I've found that the easiest way through means continually refining away obstructions within my psyche that hinder my intrinsic alignment with Dao. 

 

The alternative, which Bindi has mentioned, is the false path that's she's called spiritual by-passing. However, if that or any other path is truly false, then it will eventually self-correct because it will increasingly feel wrong – providing a practitioner has not turned off their emotions.  And I become more sensitive to increasingly subtle levels of such falsity in my life through the long and fraught process of working through my desires to refine my emotions. That also means I naturally want to move away from dependence on chaotic human heart attachments (including predefined paths and associated teachings) to more subtle and coherent connections with the numinous heart-mind of Dao. 

 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by Yueya

[KuroShiro]

On 2/24/2020 at 2:32 PM, freeform said:

[in response to esoteric Buddhism having similar processes but different methodologies for building Qi]
 

No - it’s just creating the same result (building Qi) through different means. If that makes sense?

 

Thanks, you're talking about Yuan Qi, right?

 

18 hours ago, freeform said:

And completing the path, I’m told, is just the start of another one...

 

Thank you very much for sharing this! This was my gut feeling

 

On 2/25/2020 at 10:48 PM, Bindi said:

When people negate emotions, this is the essence of negating the ‘earth’, negating yin, and spiritual bypassing. 
 

A spiritual bypass or spiritual bypassing is a "tendency to use spiritual ideas and practices to sidestep or avoid facing unresolved emotional issues, psychological wounds, and unfinished developmental tasks". 

 

Emotional issues are painful, opening up the emotional channel is hard work, easier to just see all emotions as unreal, and justify it as advanced spirituality. 

 

 

 

On 2/25/2020 at 10:48 PM, liminal_luke said:

Really?  Because this doesn´t sound remotely positive.  I know I don´t need to worry about this now -- and likely never -- but if this is where the bus is heading, let me off now. 

 

I believe it's not about negating emotions and not about not feeling. My understanding is that it's part of the process: you have to deal not only with your emotions but also with the unresolved issues of your family ancestry and past lives.

 

The emotions are in the 'realm' of Wu Xing and we live in duality, Yin Yang - this is the level of reincarnation. Once you 'reach' Tai Ji you transcend duality but that duality is within Tai Ji, your perspective is no longer the same, so why would one want to still be attached to duality/emotions?

 

4 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

If spiritual development leads to a place where all feeling is either non-existent or blunted to the point where it´s a "subtle state" what´s the point?  What is "spiritual" about such a state?  Why would someone want that?  Equanimity is great but when it slides into simply not caring, I´m not so sure.  I wouldn´t my loved ones to become enlightened if that would mean they´d lose the ability to take an interest in me and my activities. 

 

You're not paying attention!

There is no me

 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by KuroShiro

[dwai]

5 hours ago, Yueya said:

Many good comments here.  

 

 

Yeah, but......

 

For me deeper down, I only do this because, all thing considered, it's the easiest path for me. That's how Dao works, why it's sometimes referred to as the watercourse way. Mine has been a path of following my desires, of doing what I felt like, and then dealing with the consequences. Initially these consequences were almost entirely unpleasant. But slowly through an alchemical process of refinement using the whole of life as a cauldron, my desires have slowly transmuted into something far more harmonious with Dao.

 

This could also be called a path of following one's heart. And sure, I am forced to gain insight into rotten aspects of my heart. No way is this pleasant! Yet it's still the easiest thing for me to do because not dealing with it feels like stagnation and a slow death of my heart, of my soul. That's what happens with ming-xing cultivation. My alignment with Dao strengthens and I'm compelled to act accordingly because I recognise its Truth. Sure it can be difficult, but it's meaningful difficulty. And always it''s about finding the easiest way through. The easiest way through means refining my psyche so that it's more in alignment with Dao. 

That is beautiful. Strangely enough, my life has sort of gone down a similar path. And it can certainly be challenging to do something that everyone around you thinks is contrary to good sense. At one point in time, I would cast the I-ching and follow the course of action in life based on that. The I-ching can be very profound in its guidance, albeit hard to understand  

 

Over time, I noticed that stuff happened, whether I wanted them to or not. And they seemed to lead me down the path of a deeper spirituality (than before they happened). 

 

But I find that it does help to follow a set of teachings that have refined and evolved over millennia (as in the case of the wisdom traditions of the East).  Based on my experience, there needs to be an intellectual reconciliation of the "lived Truth"  with a framework that makes the "lived truth" functional in the world. 

 

I'm just thinking out loud now...feel free to chime in (anyone) if this resonates. 

 

There are a few people i personally know, who embody the "lived Truth" very powerfully. But at a certain (worldly) level, they "struggle" with the tempests of the worldly life, unable to reconcile the truth they experience and live with their environment. Being householders, they are unable to walk away from the "humdrum" and retire into solitude. One person I know didn't even know what happened to him, but he was in a state of "lived Truth" for many years before I met him. When we started talking with each other, little by little, he would describe something and I'd go "Oh...that's the technical term for what you're describing...and it is in context of nonduality/spirituality/whathaveyou" or I'd be talking about a subject and he'll describe that to a tee, without the technical terms or even understanding the concept behind it. Such people can struggle with a part of themselves that needs to stay "operational" in the transactional world. This lack of conceptual/intellectual reconciliation creates a rift in the "embodiment", as the directly experienced "truth" fails to impact up their transactional reality. 

Edited February 27, 2020 by dwai

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, KuroShiro said:

 

Thanks, you're talking about Yuan Qi, right?

 

 

Thank you very much for sharing this! This was my gut feeling

 

 

 

 

I believe it's not about negating emotions and not about not feeling. My understanding is that it's part of the process: you have to deal not only with your emotions but also with the unresolved issues of your family ancestry and past lives.

 

The emotions are in the 'realm' of Wu Xing and we live in duality, Yin Yang - this is the level of reincarnation. Once you 'reach' Tai Ji you transcend duality but that duality is within Tai Ji, your perspective is no longer the same, so why would one want to still be attached to duality/emotions?

 

 

Because as far as I know fully embodied/fully felt emotions need to be able to flow upwards freely (water rising alchemically) as a full half of the naturally occurring MCO. Water rising is a standard alchemical notion, naming that water ‘emotions’ is not standard, but it is the case IME. 
 

I believe that alchemically ‘something’ is produced if you reach Tai Ji, fuelled by a functional MCO. The elixir, the pill, some thing associated with immortality in some way. 
 

 

 

Quote

 

You're not paying attention!

There is no me

 

 

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by Bindi

[freeform]

10 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

If spiritual development leads to a place where all feeling is either non-existent or blunted to the point where it´s a "subtle state" what´s the point?  What is "spiritual" about such a state?  Why would someone want that?  Equanimity is great but when it slides into simply not caring, I´m not so sure.  I wouldn´t my loved ones to become enlightened if that would mean they´d lose the ability to take an interest in me and my activities.  

 

I´ve always thought that spirituality should make a person care more, not less.  Have I got it wrong all these years?  

 

It's an important point!

 

This is a contentious issue in the spiritual arts!

 

Why do advertisers always try to sell you on a feeling or emotion rather than on the facts? Why is the slogan for Coke "Taste The Feeling" or "Open Happiness" - and not "taste a carbonated sugar-based beverage"...

 

It's because our culture holds our emotions and our feelings as the most important, most valuable human trait. Our emotions and our feelings are what makes us human. Just look at the history of western art... it's pure drama and emotion... what about opera - the sticky over-sugared doughnut of emotionality... (You'll notice eastern art is quite different.)

 

 

We hold feelings in such high regard because they're the deeper forces moving us through life... They're far deeper, more mysterious than our thinking mind. They hold so much raw power and control over us - they can start wars or fuel the most amazing acts of kindness. This is confounding for the thinking mind - that thinks it's all-powerful (I think therefore I am), yet it is so easily overcome by emotions. "If emotion can overcome our rational minds then it must be closer to the truth than our thoughts"... "My love for my partner is real"... "My hate for bullying behaviour is real"... These are the things that make us human, right?

 

Actually most mammals have basic emotions.

 

The reason advertisers use emotions is because they are hugely conditioned and automatic. They're based on stimulus-response conditioning and they make people easily controllable... You can play on the fear that you're not attractive enough... ("because you're worth it")... you can play on the fear that you're not virile enough (enter sports car advert)... you can even play on the emotions of empathy and compassion (starving child asking for $5 a month)... or love (adverts for baby strollers) etc etc...

 

But emotions are like the waves on the ocean. With spiritual practice, you start to discover that you can dive below the waves. You thought you were the waves... but actually you're the whole ocean. When you go deeper you discover tides, you discover currents, you discover deep stillness even deeper down.

 

What you thought was the most human aspect of you is actually just the very surface... and once you discover the full extent of who you really are - those surface emotions seem like a pantomime.

 

11 hours ago, dwai said:

Unaffected is a better word. And because the sense of Self has expanded to include the whole world, a different kind of love and compassion exudes from such a person. Then the person is able to help uplift those in need, and be of service to others without any sense or expectation of getting anything in return. So some will re-enter the world with pure love and spirit of service. 

 

Just as Dwai says.

 

The aspect of you that is at the emotional level becomes rooted in the depths of the oceans - so the surface waves are like the 0.000001% of the totality of experience... You stop becoming reactive... Yes, you 'care' less... but you 'care less' in a reactive way - you're not brought to tears by a beggar in the street or by Bambi's mum dying... But (if you've followed the path correctly) you care more as a whole - when you 'love' on an all-encompassing universal scale - that advert telling you that you must protect your precious baby by using their ultra-safe baby stroller just seems laughable...

 

So yes - emotions change into 'states' - deep undercurrents of feeling. Not conditioned, reactive emotions. But part of that involves letting go of this personal identification with emotionality - I hear that it's very hard for some. It is very much like letting go of the love for your child...

 

And I need to add that it really depends on your spiritual practice whether emotions turn into Virtues or they simply release their grip and you become a (hopefully self-controlled) emotionless sociopath (one of the reasons for monastic or hermit life)... It's important to mention this because this is quite possible - and in fact much more likely to happen than transforming emotions into De or virtue.

 

 

[anshino23]

2 hours ago, freeform said:

Just as Dwai says.

 

The aspect of you that is at the emotional level becomes rooted in the depths of the oceans - so the surface waves are like the 0.000001% of the totality of experience... You stop becoming reactive... Yes, you 'care' less... but you 'care less' in a reactive way - you're not brought to tears by a beggar in the street or by Bambi's mum dying... But (if you've followed the path correctly) you care more as a whole - when you 'love' on an all-encompassing universal scale - that advert telling you that you must protect your precious baby by using their ultra-safe baby stroller just seems laughable...

 

So yes - emotions change into 'states' - deep undercurrents of feeling. Not conditioned, reactive emotions. But part of that involves letting go of this personal identification with emotionality - I hear that it's very hard for some. It is very much like letting go of the love for your child...

 

And I need to add that it really depends on your spiritual practice whether emotions turn into Virtues or they simply release their grip and you become a (hopefully self-controlled) emotionless sociopath (one of the reasons for monastic or hermit life)... It's important to mention this because this is quite possible - and in fact much more likely to happen than transforming emotions into De or virtue.

 

Wonderful post, thank you. 

 

To add to this, in my understanding, once one has reached this sort of level of development, one actually begins to see at the causal level of reality; meaning, when one does something, it's for the "whole", but on such a deep level that it's really unfathomable by our current minds - since it is based on a deep knowing of what the right thing is for that person or that situation at that specific time - that will lead to the best outcome for all involved, and lead to the most spiritual growth.

 

I think that's also where the genuine stories of Gurus (think Milarepa...) comes in - where the master calls you an idiot, or makes you travel all across the country only to come back frustrated with absolutely nothing to show for it, or having you do hundreds of hours of one particular exercise even though you experience nothing but pain and suffering from it.  All of that is done deliberately because they reside on a level where they can literally see the best way to rid you of karma (lifetimes of it) in the most fruitful way possible. 

[dwai]

 

4 hours ago, freeform said:

The aspect of you that is at the emotional level becomes rooted in the depths of the oceans - so the surface waves are like the 0.000001% of the totality of experience... You stop becoming reactive... Yes, you 'care' less... but you 'care less' in a reactive way - you're not brought to tears by a beggar in the street or by Bambi's mum dying... But (if you've followed the path correctly) you care more as a whole - when you 'love' on an all-encompassing universal scale - that advert telling you that you must protect your precious baby by using their ultra-safe baby stroller just seems laughable...

My wife and I used to have this conversation. She would go like this, "How can you love everyone equally? Would you love the neighbor's kid the same way you love our kid?" 

 

The problem is in the way we normally perceive love. Some people abhor the idea of "love" being a fruit of spiritual practices. So I wrote a little article on it on what the status of love is in various traditions, and why it is not really an emotion at all, but is rather an aspect of pure being.

Spoiler

https://www.medhajournal.com/non-dual-awareness-is-without-attributes-but-what-about-love/

Quote

 

So yes - emotions change into 'states' - deep undercurrents of feeling. Not conditioned, reactive emotions. But part of that involves letting go of this personal identification with emotionality - I hear that it's very hard for some. It is very much like letting go of the love for your child...

I think I disagree with what you wrote in terms of "letting go of the love for your child". There is no letting go of love, but rather an expansion of love to encompass everyone. Sure, if the "individual" is playing the role of a householder, they will do right by their family. 

So I'd word it as, "One loves everyone as they love their own kid". 

 

But I agree with you in the spirit of what you wrote...unaffected by the changes in the world,  some sages continue to play their role in samsara, but become beacons of light in their own communities and their light and clarity spread by osmosis. Some other sages disappear into solitude, while others take up the role of the Bodhisatva and spread their light to as many as they can. 

 

Consider someone like Lahiri Mahashaya of the Kriya Yoga lineage ( @Pilgrim can share some of his thoughts on this too) -- who went back to his life of a householder -- living as a fully enlightened sage in his own home. While someone else can be like Nisargadatta Maharaj -- who was a fully enlightened sage, and he lived in the most humble conditions, running his little street corner store selling beedis and other useless/mundane things ( @neti neti can share some thoughts on this if he feels like it). And his little flat in Mumbai would be filled with seekers from all over the world, morning through night every day -- and he would sit and talk.  Or it could be like the countless nameless sages who live in the holy mountains of the world, in little caves in complete anonymity.  Or it could be like Swami Vivekananda or Yogananda who spread their light to foreign shores out of compassion and love.

 

Quote

And I need to add that it really depends on your spiritual practice whether emotions turn into Virtues or they simply release their grip and you become a (hopefully self-controlled) emotionless sociopath (one of the reasons for monastic or hermit life)... It's important to mention this because this is quite possible - and in fact much more likely to happen than transforming emotions into De or virtue.

 

 

There is a term called "Stone Buddha" -- there is a risk of becoming like that. I know a few practitioners who have become like this -- cold, insensitive. My Master says that usually happens to those who seek only power. They can and do get powerful, but don't grow spiritually. 

Edited February 27, 2020 by dwai

[senseless virtue]

6 hours ago, freeform said:

And I need to add that it really depends on your spiritual practice whether emotions turn into Virtues or they simply release their grip and you become a (hopefully self-controlled) emotionless sociopath (one of the reasons for monastic or hermit life)... It's important to mention this because this is quite possible - and in fact much more likely to happen than transforming emotions into De or virtue.

 

This possibly highlights the far-seeing context of why Gautama Buddha taught the way he did.

 

The  Buddhist doctrine has always urged to uphold universal compassion and compassionate action both as a way to cultivate necessary merit for transforming oneself and as a means of meditation via brahmavihārās. These "brahma abodes" or four infinite minds are loving-kindness, compassion, empathic joy, and equanimity. It's not difficult to see why having this type of mindset would be very helpful for getting the virtues right.

[ilumairen]

 

6 hours ago, freeform said:

And I need to add that it really depends on your spiritual practice whether emotions turn into Virtues or they simply release their grip and you become a (hopefully self-controlled) emotionless sociopath (one of the reasons for monastic or hermit life)... It's important to mention this because this is quite possible - and in fact much more likely to happen than transforming emotions into De or virtue.

 

 

I hope you don't mind me going a bit Buddhist on you, but the unfeeling sociopath seems to arise when one has not gone deep enough into the emptiness to find the warmth - which is much as you have described, and imo, where De or spontaneous virtue arise.

 

[liminal_luke]

How about happiness?  I get that spiritual practice is hard, that it requires facing our shadow selves (never pleasant), that there´s such a thing as the "dark night of the soul."  But I´ve always thought that all these difficulties are in service of long-term happiness down the line.  True?

[neti neti]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.medhajournal.com/non-dual-awareness-is-without-attributes-but-what-about-love/

I think I disagree with what you wrote in terms of "letting go of the love for your child". There is no letting go of love, but rather an expansion of love to encompass everyone. Sure, if the "individual" is playing the role of a householder, they will do right by their family. 

So I'd word it as, "One loves everyone as they love their own kid". 

 

But I agree with you in the spirit of what you wrote...unaffected by the changes in the world,  some sages continue to play their role in samsara, but become beacons of light in their own communities and their light and clarity spread by osmosis. Some other sages disappear into solitude, while others take up the role of the Bodhisatva and spread their light to as many as they can. 

 

Consider someone like Lahiri Mahashaya of the Kriya Yoga lineage ( @Pilgrim can share some of his thoughts on this too) -- who went back to his life of a householder -- living as a fully enlightened sage in his own home.

While someone else can be like Nisargadatta Maharaj -- who was a fully enlightened sage, and he lived in the most humble conditions, running his little street corner store selling beedis and other useless/mundane things ( @neti neti can share some thoughts on this if he feels like it). And his little flat in Mumbai would be filled with seekers from all over the world, morning through night every day -- and he would sit and talk.  Or it could be like the countless nameless sages who live in the holy mountains of the world, in little caves in complete anonymity.  Or it could be like Swami Vivekananda or Yogananda who spread their light to foreign shores out of compassion and love.. 

 

I've been summoned! 

 

I only add that by virtue of the sage's loving view of those drawn to him as himself, he assumes the required roles that meet the needs which arise!

 

Edited February 27, 2020 by neti neti