Sam Harris and Rupert Spira

[dwai]

7 minutes ago, Daemon said:

An excellent and pertinent question and one that I'd encourage you and others to ponder. I provided a signpost to the answer earlier by referring to your membership of Jeff's group. 🙂

it’s mighty presumptuous of you to suggest that I’m a member of any group, let alone Jeff’s group. 
 

Moreover, there is no such group here on TDB (at least not for a while now). 

 

7 minutes ago, Daemon said:

 

5 hours ago, dwai said:

What do you think is the difference between deep sleep and nirvikalpa samadhi? 

 

It's analogous to the difference between darkness and light or the difference between ignorance and knowledge. 🙂

That’s as wishy-washy an answer as any I’ve seen.  
 

Although, I see the general direction of your thought-process. Not much seems to have changed in terms of your demeanor, from what I can remember from earlier interactions.  

[Daemon]

22 minutes ago, dwai said:

there is no such group here on TDB (at least not for a while now). 

 

Why did it fold? Was it just because Jeff was banned?

 

22 minutes ago, dwai said:

That’s as wishy-washy an answer as any I’ve seen.  

 

How disappointing. 🙂

 

24 minutes ago, dwai said:

Although, I see the general direction of your thought-process.

 

Are you saying that you've developed some sort of telepathic siddhi? 😯

 

☮

[doc benway]

14 hours ago, Daemon said:

Now, all that anyone needs to do is to apply a bit of common sense and self inquiry.

Firstly, consider deep sleep, which (by common agreement) is dreamless. Even if it isn't dreamless, you already know that nothing happens that you can remember, so nothing has ever been described about the experience by anyone nor will it ever be described by anyone (except as a lingering sense that they “slept well").

Secondly, consider that some people claim to remember what happened during their deep sleep. If you stop to consider this for even a moment, instead of buying into their delusion without proper thought, you'll realise that these people couldn't be describing deep sleep (by definition). They must therefore be describing either a dream (or an experience of nirvikalpa samadhi).

There’s a video of Greg Goode tearing this nonsense about deep sleep to shreds while describing his experiences of putting straight some of these people who imagine that they have a memory of deep sleep (while he's simultaneously laughing his socks off).

 

His punchline is “Dude, that was a dream...😂🤣😂🤣😂"

 

☮

 

 

During a sleep yoga retreat a few years ago I asked this very question, if indeed someone has an experience of awareness during deep sleep how could there be memory of it in the total absence of any content or object of experience? The answer given was basically, through practice and direct experience I may one day have my question answered.

 

11 hours ago, dwai said:

In my own humble experience, that is the case. It is an experience -- but not like other experiences. It is literally an experience of the absence of phenomena. Words cannot describe it -- there is no time, there is no space, only being.

 

The reason why deep sleep and nirvikalpa samadhi are categorized as different is while under the influence of Maya (i.e. a layperson), deep sleep is awareness enveloped in a covering of tamas (the inertial quality). In Nirvikalpa Samadhi, the veil of Maya is dropped, and there is only awareness without that envelope of tamas (darkness). 

 

I subsequently did have my question answered. My experience was much as you describe - no dream, no mental or physical activity, simply unbounded awareness blissfully aware of itself during sleep. Yet there was very clear memory of that experience upon awakening. How to label this? A type of dreamless dream? Awareness during deep sleep? Nirvakalpa samadhi? Since I practice in a Tibetan paradigm I go with a Tibetan label, the clear light of sleep. Here is a brief excerpt from my teacher’s book on the subject.

https://voiceofclearlight.org/2016/june-2016/609-june-2016-distinctions-between-dream-and-sleep-yoga

 

[dwai]

7 hours ago, Daemon said:

 

Why did it fold? Was it just because Jeff was banned?

You have to ask members of Jeff’s group. 

7 hours ago, Daemon said:

How disappointing. 🙂

 

I don’t really need an answer from you as I already know it, was curious to see if your were actually interested in a discourse or whether you’ve come to do oneupmanship. I think I know the answer...

7 hours ago, Daemon said:

Are you saying that you've developed some sort of telepathic siddhi? 😯

 

☮

Telepathy is not necessary. Some are transparent enough that we can see right through them  

[Daemon]

1 hour ago, steve said:

The answer given was basically, through practice and direct experience I may one day have my question answered.

 

That's a very interesting answer, particularly as it's different to the answer that I"d have given you to that question.

 

☮

 

[Daemon]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

I don’t really need an answer from you as I already know it

 

Wow! 😯

You should contact Rick on Buddha at the Gas Pump (batgap.com) and request an interview so that you can share it with a wider audience.

 

☮

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Daemon

[forestofclarity]

Just now, dwai said:

This particular "problem" that Sam points out, is due to the mistaken identification of Consciousness with an individual (who is considered to be unconscious or in deep sleep, or awake) -- or perhaps, better worded as "mistaken identification of consciousness with all individuals". That is why the statement, "you might not be aware of the world outside when you are in deep sleep or under anesthesia, but others continue experiencing the world". The assumption here is that consciousness is an emergence from/consequence of these individuals (you and "others"). But such is not the case. Consciousness is non-dual, and it appears to operate through these separate beings. It is the same consciousness that causes "absence of the world" of the world in the "deep sleepers", while simultaneously causes the "experience of the world" in the "wakers".

 

 

As an aside, Berekeley, who denies the need to assert any material world, instead ascribes to God the functioning of the "objective world" when no one is watching. 

 

The initial problem, still, is the problem of universalizing one's experience. Rupert (in my mind) has a tendency to deny the use of inference, and then resurrect inference to support the views he likes.

 

Is there a personal, non-inferential experience can one have that leads one to the conclusion, "[c]onsciousness is non-dual, and it appears to operate through these separate beings. It is the same consciousness that causes "absence of the world" of the world in the "deep sleepers", while simultaneously causes the "experience of the world" in the "wakers"."?

 

[doc benway]

17 minutes ago, Daemon said:

 

That's a very interesting answer, particularly as it's different to the answer that I"d have given you to that question.

 

☮

 

 

One of the greatest lessons I've learned from my teacher is that of patience and openness to what I don't understand.

Rather than grasp onto paradigms and theory, his invitation is to trust in the practice and see what you discover for yourself.

Often when we don't understand a teaching or experience, we reject it as not being consistent with our conceptual construct.

This shuts out so much possibility for growth.

His advice has been to be OK with not knowing and being open to the possibility that there may be a deeper understanding at some point. That has worked well for me. 

[Daemon]

Yes. The Mystery is mysterious. :-)

 

☮

 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Daemon

[Daemon]

12 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

Is there a personal, non-inferential experience can one have that leads one to the conclusion, "[c]onsciousness is non-dual, and it appears to operate through these separate beings. It is the same consciousness that causes "absence of the world" of the world in the "deep sleepers", while simultaneously causes the "experience of the world" in the "wakers"."?

 

 

No. The confirmation is entirely impersonal, which is worth bearing in mind whenever you come come across anyone who is bragging that they're enlightened.

 

☮

 

[dwai]

27 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

As an aside, Berekeley, who denies the need to assert any material world, instead ascribes to God the functioning of the "objective world" when no one is watching. 

 

The initial problem, still, is the problem of universalizing one's experience. Rupert (in my mind) has a tendency to deny the use of inference, and then resurrect inference to support the views he likes.

Inference is certainly an early companion in the inquiry process. But inference will give rise to realization. When there is realization, inference's job is done. The problem is due to/known as "avidya", and the method of resolution is "vichara". It resolves in "Self realization".  Of course, that is speaking from a Vedantic perspective. 

 

The "universalizing" that is happening is a method of instruction. The teacher tells the seeker, "Verily, all is Brahman/Self". The student then goes through the process of introspection, listening to further commentary by the teacher until they come to the same realization.  At least, that's the way I see it.

Quote

 

Is there a personal, non-inferential experience can one have that leads one to the conclusion, "[c]onsciousness is non-dual, and it appears to operate through these separate beings. It is the same consciousness that causes "absence of the world" of the world in the "deep sleepers", while simultaneously causes the "experience of the world" in the "wakers"."?

 

Of course, there is -- that is called "realization". Is it an "experience" in the sense of subject-object? No. But with the realization, there is no longer any need for conceptualization, though it might be needed as a vehicle of explanation/dissemination. It is not inference or intuition, but a recognition of the "truth". 

 

There are of course other experiences such as the feeling of unity, etc. For instance, it has often happened to me that while I'm walking down a road, suddenly the road, the trees, the people, vehicles, animals, etc all become "me".  That is, the "me" expands to include all, in a most distinct and unimaginable way.  But if someone was to be skeptical about it, they'd say, "oh it's all in your mind...you imagined it!" 

 

P.S. Teachers of Jnana yoga will also categorize these experiences as mystical experiences, and then point towards our everyday experiences instead. But it is also true that many of the greatest masters of Jnana yoga were also great mystics (Tantra and Dhyana Siddhas). 

43 minutes ago, Daemon said:

You should contact Rick on Buddha at the Gas Pump (batgap.com) and request an interview so that you can share it with a wider audience.

There are many such people sharing it with a wider audience. In fact, there are several ancient wisdom traditions that have been doing precisely that for thousands of years. I have nothing new to report  

Edited February 7, 2021 by dwai

[silent thunder]

2 hours ago, steve said:

A type of dreamless dream? Awareness during deep sleep? Nirvakalpa samadhi? Since I practice in a Tibetan paradigm I go with a Tibetan label, the clear light of sleep. Here is a brief excerpt from my teacher’s book on the subject.

https://voiceofclearlight.org/2016/june-2016/609-june-2016-distinctions-between-dream-and-sleep-yoga

 

Timely synchronous sharing.  Thank you. 

 

Dreamless awareness and lucidity within objectlessness has become a regular unfolding lately... initiating in the hour of 3am as awareness arises out of deep sleep, the body remains asleep and awareness abides objectlessness in presence.  An immersive dreamless dream, while lucid.

 

This topic as a whole, but this passage and your sharing in particular emanate penetrating harmonic resonance to what has unfolded as the pivotal anchor of my process in recent years, (deeply grateful folks take their time to share here.  These shared markers along 'the pathless path' are invaluable to me).

 

TWR and his book on Tibetan Sleep and Dream Yoga's has been an enduring and penetrating catalyst for major shift in my process from the moment it veritably leapt off the shelf into my hands years ago.  Particularly in the aspects of the waking dream state and the oscillation of immersion versus lucidity within and its mirrored aspects in sleeping dreams.  I've been a lucid sleeping dreamer since childhood.  Now with increasing inertia, these processes have begun to mirror in waking awareness as well.  Lucidity within the waking dream was always gnawing at the edges of my field... but this blossoming and its more recent accompanying experience of the objectless was wholly unanticipated and its affect on all layers of waking and sleeping dream awareness is... well beyond my words.

 

Thankfully, TWR through the lense of the Bon tradition (juxtaposed with the varying perceptions shared throughout the entire conversation and accompanying notions of Maya projections) illuminates resonant kinship and foundational recognition with my experiential process, to beneficial release. 

 

Long winded way of saying... thank you, much kinship is experienced in this sharing.

[doc benway]

22 minutes ago, silent thunder said:

TWR and his book on Tibetan Sleep and Dream Yoga's has been an enduring and penetrating catalyst for major shift in my process from the moment it veritably leapt off the shelf into my hands years ago. 

 

I believe he is working on a book dedicated to sleep yoga currently.

Not sure of a publication date.

He's always got a lot going on but spent much of 2020 in retreat.

[silent thunder]

Inherent, reflected connections to Bon and Zen continue to emerge. 

 

Intriguing as I've never actively pursued either, yet continually recognize kinship with both unfolding within.

[forestofclarity]

I have an interesting little story. From time to time, I do a little lucid sleeping, and I used to spontaneously do it before I became a Buddhist. Back in college, I had a recurring dream. I was stuck in an empty void full of crackling energy. I had no body, no mind, no nothing. It was utterly terrifying. At the time, my primary paradigm was the Christian one, and based on some research I was fairly convinced that I was dreaming about Hell. 

 

Jump forward some decade or two, and I have a similar experience when a dream breaks apart. But now, it doesn't feel like hell at all--- it feels like an emptiness full of pregnant possibilities. The exact same experience, two very different results. The fear and terror I felt in college was a result of having nothing to grab onto. However, after practicing for some time, this "nothing to grab onto" feels liberating. 

 

Almost every Buddhist teacher I've held in high regard has said something similar. It is interesting to see how many things I discounted as ridiculous now seem to be quite plausible (rebirth being the biggest one for me). 

 

Just now, steve said:

My experience was much as you describe - no dream, no mental or physical activity, simply unbounded awareness blissfully aware of itself during sleep.

 

Just now, steve said:

Often when we don't understand a teaching or experience, we reject it as not being consistent with our conceptual construct.

[Daemon]

Nancy Evans Bush speaks to disquieting experiences like this in her book Dancing Past the Dark: Distressing Near Death Experiences, which might be a useful reference for a lurker or for another member who might be stuggling with such experiences.

 

☮

 

[natural]

I do not know for sure, but I have dreamed some crazy stuff.

 I asked Alfie "What's it all about?

I think the answer was influenced by a rabbit.

Failing to get an adequate answer from Alfie I turned to Ella.

Her response was, its Memorex.

 

Not to denigrate any ones reality, but I don't find Harvey, whom I visit with regularly, in his form, to be a reliable source of anything.

With the exception of were to graze, on some awesome grass.

And yes, I do recommend you put it your pipe and smoke it!

[forestofclarity]

Just now, dwai said:

The "universalizing" that is happening is a method of instruction. The teacher tells the seeker, "Verily, all is Brahman/Self". The student then goes through the process of introspection, listening to further commentary by the teacher until they come to the same realization.  At least, that's the way I see it.

 

Well, it is one thing to say "everything which I experience is Brahman," and quite another to say "everything anybody experiences, has ever experienced, or ever will experienced, and anything beyond experience is also Brahman." This is the leap Sam is talking about. 

 

And if realized masters are able to experience this, and thereby experience all knowledge, then they sort of suck for not curing cancer, introducing sanitation in ancient times, etc. 

 

Just now, dwai said:

Of course, there is -- that is called "realization". Is it an "experience" in the sense of subject-object? No. But with the realization, there is no longer any need for conceptualization, though it might be needed as a vehicle of explanation/dissemination. It is not inference or intuition, but a recognition of the "truth". 

 

For it to be incorrigible, it has to be direct experience. In other words, one would have to experience being all minds, and beyond all mind, simultaneously. 

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, steve said:

 

During a sleep yoga retreat a few years ago I asked this very question, if indeed someone has an experience of awareness during deep sleep how could there be memory of it in the total absence of any content or object of experience? The answer given was basically, through practice and direct experience I may one day have my question answered.

 

I had practice and direct experience of this and the conclusion I came to was it is dependent on memory .    One might be fully conscious of something and doing it , but later forget it  . So then there is no memory of 'being conscious' .

 

My experience was doing a meditation that required breaking the sleep cycle .   Since I could not remember doing it in the morning, and not sure I did do it, I started leaving myself a note  at night  saying I had done the meditation.  Some mornings, I would have sworn I slept all night , yet there was the note in the morning .

 

' Stream of Consciousness'  relies on memory  to string it all together like a film , otherwise consciousness is like  looking at  'stills'  - series of photographs and  forgetting the previous ones, each time a new one is seen .

 

 

 

7 hours ago, steve said:

 

 

I subsequently did have my question answered. My experience was much as you describe - no dream, no mental or physical activity, simply unbounded awareness blissfully aware of itself during sleep. Yet there was very clear memory of that experience upon awakening. How to label this? A type of dreamless dream? Awareness during deep sleep? Nirvakalpa samadhi? Since I practice in a Tibetan paradigm I go with a Tibetan label, the clear light of sleep. Here is a brief excerpt from my teacher’s book on the subject.

https://voiceofclearlight.org/2016/june-2016/609-june-2016-distinctions-between-dream-and-sleep-yoga

 

 

 

Hmmm , I never had that .   I have had this unusual experience often ;   I am lying there thinking I am asleep*  and I hear a noise , its not that I am woken up by the noise ,  or other stimulus but I am surprised that I am 'awake enough '   to be aware  ( but this probably is not when I am in a state of deep sleep ) .

 

*  what the hell does  ' thinking I am asleep '  mean ?      

[dwai]

53 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

This is the leap Sam is talking about. 

 

And if realized masters are able to experience this, and thereby experience all knowledge, then they sort of suck for not curing cancer, introducing sanitation in ancient times, etc. 

 

Why is “all knowledge” in the domain of this?
Knowledge of that kind is specific to the mind — Localized. To know more, the limitations of the mind need to be reduced.
 

Again, the point being made is realizing the universality of consciousness doesn’t imply automatically that all phenomenal knowledge becomes accessible. Knowing the universal nature of space doesn’t automatically imply all objects in space are known as well. 
 

haha btw sanitation in ancient times was not such a rare thing. There were flushing toilets and well planned sewage systems in the sarasvati-Indus civilization  

53 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

For it to be incorrigible, it has to be direct experience. In other words, one would have to experience being all minds, and beyond all mind, simultaneously

I disagree. There is a habitual conflation of mind and consciousness which leads to that line of logic. 

[forestofclarity]

19 hours ago, dwai said:

Why is “all knowledge” in the domain of this?
Knowledge of that kind is specific to the mind — Localized. To know more, the limitations of the mind need to be reduced.
 

Again, the point being made is realizing the universality of consciousness doesn’t imply automatically that all phenomenal knowledge becomes accessible. Knowing the universal nature of space doesn’t automatically imply all objects in space are known as well. 

 

Well, unless one takes a Brahman-eyed view, how does one verify Brahman? 

 

[dwai]

45 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

Well, unless one takes a Brahman-eyed view, how does one verify Brahman? 

 

Indeed. But who said Brahman needs to "know it all"?

In a dream, do you know it all, or only know from the perspective of the "individual" role that you have assumed therein? 

[anshino23]

22 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

And if realized masters are able to experience this, and thereby experience all knowledge, then they sort of suck for not curing cancer, introducing sanitation in ancient times, etc. 

 

This is a very limited way of thinking. If you think that by aligning yourself with the Dao means that justice no longer exists, you can cure whoever you will whenever you want for whatever reason, you would be wrong. If you are authentically enlightened and fully aligned with Dao, it is not just you - but Divine Providence - that acts through you. There is a right time and place for everything. 

 

On top of this, there may very well be ways to cure every single disease on the planet - but everything starts from the mind. In other words, even if you treated those illnesses and removed the symptoms of them in their manifest (current) life, it would manifest again in a later incarnation. Why? The root was never cured, which existed in the mind and was never transformed. 

 

Are you then helping or hindering them? Being a Buddha or a devil? Food for thought... Depends on whether you believe we reincarnate and it's not just "this" lifetime that matters but the whole trajectory of your own development over countless lifetimes until full enlightenment.  

Edited February 8, 2021 by anshino23

[forestofclarity]

2 hours ago, dwai said:

Indeed. But who said Brahman needs to "know it all"?

In a dream, do you know it all, or only know from the perspective of the "individual" role that you have assumed therein? 

 

An interesting aside (for now): I once had a dream where I met a dream being. Sometimes, when I become lucid in a dream, I start to tell the "others." Often, they ignore me, carrying on with what they are doing. In this one dream, things went something like this:

 

Me (M) to Dream Being (DB): I'm dreaming right now. Isn't that so cool?

DB: No, I'm dreaming right now. You're appearing in MY dream as a figment of my imagination. 

M: Oh yeah? Can you do this? 

   (I fly around).

DB: Yes. 

  He flies around.

M: Can you do this?

 (I change weather)

DB: Of course.

(changes weather)

Etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[forestofclarity]

1 hour ago, anshino23 said:

 

This is a very limited way of thinking. If you think that by aligning yourself with the Dao means that justice no longer exists, you can cure whoever you will whenever you want for whatever reason, you would be wrong. If you are authentically enlightened and fully aligned with Dao, it is not just you - but Divine Providence - that acts through you. There is a right time and place for everything. 

 

On top of this, there may very well be ways to cure every single disease on the planet - but everything starts from the mind. In other words, even if you treated those illnesses and removed the symptoms of them in their manifest (current) life, it would manifest again in a later incarnation. Why? The root was never cured, which existed in the mind and was never transformed. 

 

Are you then helping or hindering them? Being a Buddha or a devil? Food for thought... Depends on whether you believe we reincarnate and it's not just "this" lifetime that matters but the whole trajectory of your own development over countless lifetimes until full enlightenment.  

 

Here's a question: for a medical doctor, should one actually treat any patients? Why not leave them to their karma? Maybe by curing them in this life, one is hurting them in the long run? 

Edited February 8, 2021 by forestofemptiness