How would you counter this hypothesis to the ‘Enlightenment’ idea?

[galen_burnett]

@iinatti i don’t believe you really think that. there are many instances in this thread alone of people saying they think ‘perpetual-bliss’ is attainable, despite their efforts to gaslight me to the contrary. and again, it’s insulting of you to think me dim enough to be able to be gaslit into thinking that these philosophies don’t proselytise that notion.

Edited August 23, 2023 by galen_burnett

[galen_burnett]

@silent thunder no. i completely disagree. Dirt is for running and for writing. Pits, however, are for trailing. 

[galen_burnett]

@steve your second comment on 20/08/23

 

I’ve covered elsewhere in the thread the matter of why it is not possible for a Soul to experience the Non-Dual; and it is even less possible for a Soul to merge with it while somehow keeping their Form in Duality preserved for them to revisit whenever they please and thereby tell the rest of us about the Non-Dual.

 

your reply to myself on 21/08/23. your contradiction was at once saying your spiritual path is one of ‘non-avoidance’ and that it is the path to ‘liberation’: the very act of deliberately following a path to liberation is inherently an act of avoiding or escaping from something. Avoidance and escape are synonymous considering that they convey the same feeling of the actor—“trying to not be in the presence of the object”—: one who is trying to escape from something certainly wants to avoid it also; they may understand that they will need to stand and face the unpleasant thing in order to ‘defeat’ it, but doing so would be in order to ultimately escape and ultimately avoid its presence. I am assuming of course that you are ascribing the ‘permanent’ qualifier to that ‘liberation’; but if you are not, then we agree—yes, life is a constant game of escaping the things we don’t like and being liberated from their presence, which liberation is only ever temporary as a new pain will always come to replace the old defeated one. Buddhists profess ‘impermanence’, yet they’re allowed to break that rule and keep ‘permanence’ for their special Ananda…

 

That quote just says to me that we should deal with the problems—which perhaps at first seem to be contradictions—we have in our lives cleverly and with patience and with sophistication, and that this is the best way to resolve them. No, nearly all contradiction (besides those at the most fundamental levels of ontological contemplation—“what is Consciousness?” etc.) can be resolved. 

 

It sounds to me like you’re equating ‘contradiction’ with ‘problem’. No, a problem or antagonism is a conflict; there is nothing inherently contradictory about it, it is not inherently a paradox; problems generally make sense and can be resolved. Contradictions or paradoxes, however, are illogical nonsense and cannot be resolved. Contradictions or paradoxes can be problems—a contradiction in an argument can be a problem, for example—; but problems are not inherently contradictions or paradoxes—low water pressure in a piping system is a problem, but there’s nothing paradoxical about the mechanics of plumbing and water-distribution. 

Edited August 23, 2023 by galen_burnett

[galen_burnett]

@C T ok chief. i’ll let you have the last word, you need it

[galen_burnett]

@liminal_luke 19/08/23 and 20/08/23 except it is in fact all about avoiding or escaping Samsara—cue people telling me avoiding is not the same as escaping (‘avoidance’ and ‘escape’ are synonymous considering that they convey the same feeling of the actor—“trying to not be in the presence of the object”.)

 

“misunderstandings”: look at C T’s comment on 20/8/23, in the last paragraph he explicitly states that ‘perpetual bliss’ can be attained! “[…] type of bliss happening […] as long as the angler remains enthused […] There's a perpetuity”. There is no misunderstanding; there is an elephant in the room and I’ve just photographed it in black-and-white for you.

 

“Against all odds, this thread has taken a miraculously informative turn.” informative = confirmation bias.

 

In a later comment of yours on 20/08/23. “This last step is a doozy and I can't speak to it from experience except to say that I suspect it's weird incomprehensibility opens up into exquisite beauty.”: so there you have it in black-and-white again! the various degrees of ‘avoidance’ you described are cultivated in those lower tiers of meditation, presumably until they become second-nature; then, following the same pattern, this “exquisite beauty” can be cultivated through this ‘ultimate step’ of meditation, until it too is second-nature and perpetual. And what happened to ‘being a beginner at the base camp’? you’ve implied you’re familiar with advanced degrees of meditation—not such a beginner then really are you? false humility? only claim to be a novice when it suits your argument? you’d be a fool to think i’m not aware of how esteemed the rhetoric of ‘the beginner, who chops wood and carry water’ is, and of how people shape their ‘spiritual-egos’ around it within these social-circles.

 

Your comment on 21/08/23 regarding a strong identity. These people don’t “realise their ‘separate self’ is illusory”, their egos don’t shatter. No, the ego cannot be destroyed, nor even diminished. The ego is your Soul’s subjection to happiness and suffering; at any given time an ego will have a certain shape which means it has certain preferences, which means the things which cause it happiness and suffering will be specific; a Soul cannot exist without an ego and the ‘size’ of an ego does not change ever. The ego is intrinsic to the Soul, without the ego their is no awareness, no Consciousness, no observation; the ego is the fundamental definition of a Form; it comes from Greek for ‘I’. All that happens in a perceived ‘shattering’ of an ego is that it’s preferences change: whereas before the ego was invested in, say, self-image and social power, now it realises those pursuits don’t serve it anymore and instead it invests in other things, probably more ‘internal’ things, which gives the illusion that they become ‘selfless’. They don’t escape the game of happiness and suffering, it’s just that they now source their happiness from different things, which things are no endless gold-mind, but are just as ‘challenging’ to come by as those sources they used to rely on. The difference is their preferences have changed. A person undergoes a transformation whereby they used to go for a high-paying job and a beautiful partner etc. , and now instead are most interested in, say, books and creativity. Before they will have suffered certain tribulations in acquiring their wealth and attractive partner; now, they still suffer tribulations, but instead they are those that are inherent in reading books and making things. Their ego beforehand could be said to be ‘externally focused’ now it is ‘internally focused’; neither is better nor worse; the difference is their ego’s preferences changed. The changing of the ego does not result in greater happiness in the long-run: yes there will be a surge of happiness in the immediate period following that change as the person is relieved from the life which had come to burden them, it then being focussed on what became to be  irrelevant preferences, and is now placed in a new life in which suddenly seemingly everywhere they look they have access to things to satisfy their new preferences (the tribulations of this new life yet to be perceived). So the change of the ego is necessary: the ego can’t stay in its old life having evolved; yet the ratio of what it suffers and what it enjoys, as it journeys through its transformations and lifetimes, does not shift overall—50/50. We perceive that such a person ‘becomes who they really are’ because they have entered a world the tribulations of which we who remain in the old world cannot perceive, so they seem to be perfectly at ease; there could be any number of reasons why they choose to hide the misery of their life from us and only show us their happy side. Also, they may seem to ‘be truly themselves’ because they have abandoned efforts to form a ‘self-image’, as doing so no longer gives them satisfaction; instead their image is just what presents itself ‘naturally’ to others; such a person has not attained glorious eternal bliss, they still hurt like anyone else, they just don’t get anything anymore from sculpting an image for themselves, whereas plenty of other people in the world still will do even if they can appreciate the freedom that must come from letting all of that image-care go.

Edited August 23, 2023 by galen_burnett

[galen_burnett]

@Daniel in your reply to liminal_luke on 21/08/23 you quoted this:

 

"When the Hinayāna speaks of no self, it is in reference to the manifest forms of presently existing life; the intent is to alert people to transcend this level, and attain Nirvāna.” there it is again, an explicit citation of the notion that it is possible to attain Nirvana, which, yes, I’m assuming translates to ‘perpetual-bliss’.

 

Not saying you yourself are proselytising it—I know you’re agnostic. It’s just useful for my argument when such an example presents itself.

Edited August 23, 2023 by galen_burnett

[galen_burnett]

@Pak_Satrio i was wrong about you. you’re doomed to grow up to become an npc after-all. yes, yes things tend to get more comfortable when one buries one’s head in the sand—this is something you’ll master as you grow up, i’m sure

[galen_burnett]

@Mark Foote 20/08/23 yes the notion of an infinitely progressing and unfolding existence is interesting, which is what I think the idea of not being able to prove all mathematics implies; and I said in my reply to Daniel that I admit it could be the truth; just that it doesn’t make as much sense to me—with my current understanding—as my current model does. I could still fit my 50/50 pain-joy ratio in such a reality however, and could still deny ‘perpetual-bliss’ in it also.

 

your second comment of 20/08/23

 

“[…] speaks of the stopping of perceiving and feeling, and lays down that this belongs to happiness.” another sighting of the ‘elephant in the room’. so then perpetual cessation of ‘perception and feeling’ is striven for, leading to ‘perpetual happiness’.

 

“As I've said elsewhere, I think the notion of everlasting bliss is more of a Hindu or East Indian assumption than a Buddhist or Daoist one.” i think that differentiation between the Eastern philosophies is very dubious; and I’ve just quoted in this sequence of my replies a Buddhist explicitly saying that ‘perpetual bliss’ is attainable! And if then you are saying that perpetual cessation of ‘perception and feeling’ cannot be attained then what ratio of happiness-to-suffering is attainable in this model? 50%? 80%? 99%? In my view happiness and suffering balance in a 50/50 ratio and that is inviolable. If Buddhists think a higher ratio of happiness can be attained, well, then we just disagree.

Edited August 23, 2023 by galen_burnett

[liminal_luke]

Well I guess that settles it then.

[Cobie]

.

Edited September 12, 2023 by Cobie

[galen_burnett]

31 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Well I guess that settles it then.

somehow i feel my victory is hollow…

Edited August 23, 2023 by galen_burnett

[galen_burnett]

18 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Wise words indeed.

you wanna contribute or…?

[galen_burnett]

On 22/08/2023 at 4:58 AM, Daniel said:

 

It depends on what sort of experience you're asking about.  I wouldn't describe anything in my "current" life experiences in terms of acheivement of any sort of non-dual perception.  I would instead use the words: expanded awareness.

 

 

During the experience of expansion, on a small scale, it feels like using peripheral vision and focused vision simultaneously.  No, I don't have trouble communicating during those episodes.  Probably because I am at ease.  But also since it's dualistic ( or perhaps a better word is diverse ), all the tools of language are available.

 

Sounds like a very cool experience you had Daniel!

[Daniel]

@galen_burnett,

 

Just quick note;  I saw your earlier reply.  I'll respond soon  

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, galen_burnett said:

Sounds like a very cool experience you had Daniel!

 

Hee.  "cool".  Nice choice of words.  Depending on the experience, I'll actually go take a cold shower.  Because my brain feels squeezy and hot and the cold helps a lot with that.

[silent thunder]

19 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Especially if contentment comes from contemplating a successful outcome of effort .

 

It seems to relate to satisfaction , relaxation, contemplation and observation of what we have done that  'made a difference' .

i get what you're saying and perhaps contentment is not conveying the semantics of what I'm experiencing and attempting to convey, but so far, it's the only word that fits for me.

 

The contentment I'm referring to, does not seem to arise as a result of any achievement or contemplation of a concept, or the result of any particular input of the conditions about my local awareness or from my local awareness' reflecting to and of the greater whole of Indra's Net. 

 

Another way to phrase it might be it is a sensing and acknowledging what is as is, an expression of acceptance in abiding.  A very mundane sense of my own beingness as one is, where one is and this abides as the ground state of not needing, seeking of, or seeking to dismiss any of the conditions of which local awareness finds itself a part of...  a ground state recognition and release of beingness simultaneously part of the whole and an expression of the whole.  

 

Gah, words are often such tiny things when relating to experiences.  I'll let this attempt rest here for now, perhaps another set of words will arise that may convey more the sense of what I'm experiencing and trying to share.

 

G'day mate, thanks for your contributions, as always they are deeply appreciated and help me to know my own self better through their reflection.

Edited August 23, 2023 by silent thunder
finished a partial thought in a sentence

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

4 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@Pak_Satrio i was wrong about you. you’re doomed to grow up to become an npc after-all. yes, yes things tend to get more comfortable when one buries one’s head in the sand—this is something you’ll master as you grow up, i’m sure

How will I ever recover?

[iinatti]

.

Edited September 27, 2023 by iinatti

[Nungali]

10 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

 

Eudaimonia in the eastern context, is similar to what is known as Dharma or living based on values. 

 

You have done it again ;    given a term a wrong definition and attempt to argue about it from that wrong definition .

 

Eudaimonia is NOT 'similar to dharma'  !  Two of its aspects however are significant in eudamonia  but  a range of other aspects are also included that bring about that state .

 

The performance of duties and Dharma is bound to result in happiness as per eastern philosophy, due to the austerity in duty. 

Dharma is one of the four purusharthas or objectives of human life.

 

Sure .  Bit that is immaterial to my argument because, as you just said , it brings about (mere ) happiness . And as you just pointed out it is but one of the four .... just as it is but one of the many in eudaimonia .

 

 

By adherence to Dharma through value based living and self-discipline, worldly happiness can be maximised without crossing any moral boundaries .

 

 However the happiness of Dharma is also considered inferior to the bliss of Moksha or enlightenment. It is the adherents of Dharma however who have the highest chance of attaining enlightenment. 

 

Dude !  You are trying to convince me by showing me what I already know .  You are STILL missing the point .

 

I will trrty again with you ;  Eudaimonia is a state that abides beyond and through  the happiness / unhappiness scale .

 

That triangular arrangement   :   happiness < -------------- > unghappiness   is a 'base line' of a triangle ,  'eudaimonia exists above that base line as an 'apex' . Some have termed that state 'bliss'  , other have a different term for it .

 

But that does not mean that this apex is the same as all the others that use this same triangular imprint for energies interacting on the IDEAL plane .

 

I can  include a paper on it  below if you care to read about this universal pattern  ( and yes it does include your 'Brahma'  ... its in the Brahma , Vishnu, Shiva 'triangle'  .... and each triangle of ideal forces causes a manifestation breakthrough 'down'  into another level ... a 'pendant' to the triangle  (  in this case , look at  one of the associated Goddess , or all of the multitude of them  ) , creating the 'four fold ' world of the elements ... or since we are on a daoist forum ... see Ch 42 TTC .

 

  NOW  you can see  (  ?  )   I am actually affirming what you say about a higher level originating  but being beyond the world of duality ; extremes of a thing  ... a line with two ends  etc >

 

 

 You are jumping to conclusions due to poor understanding as usual.

 

No , YOU just affirmed you do not understand the state at all due to you wrongly defining it above . I guess you rushed off to do do a quick google search on it and got partial information from someone who has not researched the state properly  ... and that applies to most modern psychologists as well, being a fairly recent inclusion in the field . I have only encountered two papers on it that seem to have a broader understanding  of the state .

 

Again ... I am saying it is above tghe base line of happiness : unhappiness  ... but there is no need to worry or feel threatened that this implies it is trying to take over your own concepts of a higher spiritual , and Vedic understanding of an ultimate 'above perspective' .

 

You have spent  a lot of time here arguing due to your YOUR poor understanding  ..... it isnt about my poor understanding of Vedanta at all, its about your poor understanding of eudaimonia and your assumption that I am talking about a Vedic arrangement ) although that does follow a similar arrangement  ... ti doesnt mean that it is the same thing though, an assumption that you appear to have fallen into .

 

Its like You have said    Brahma is a state above both  Shiva and Vishnu .   And I have said   ' Yes, like  Dao is  state or concept above yin and yang .  And you are arguing that   Dao is not Brahma ... or trying to prove  Brahma is 'better' than dao , or different  ( which it is , but it isnt 'wrong' )

 

 Those familiar with the ancient philosophies of yoga and advaita can understand what I am talking here.

 

I  am familiar with those and I do know what you are talking about , you have just misapplied the knowledge  as you dont recognize the Universal pattern ; its in everything  from the various cultures valid philosophies and cosmology ( Vedanta , Christian , Jewish, etc ), nature , color perception , physics ,  etc etc .   I can easily demonstrate this if you want to read my  article on it .

 

and also you can cut the  Indian ego :  ' oh dear this uneducated westerner in the eastern arts'  bullshit  and tighten up your understanding and argument , before  you  try to pull that one here .

 

10 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

You are also claiming that I am unfamiliar with the state. But if you claim that I am unfamiliar, that implies that you are familiar with the state of nondual perception, and can identify the errors. 

 

What ?   No .  Just because you are  not familiar with eudaimonia    ( most people, nearly everyone is not ... so this is not a judgement or anything  and you have clearly demonstrated you are not familar with nor understand it )  does not equate to me being unfamiliar with the state of non dual perception ... what weird 'logic' .

 

So why don't you describe your own experience of nondual perception here, other than drug related hallucinations. 

 

Weave dodge and come out here !  Then ask me that question ?        Is this 'Indian logic'  ? 

 

I am sure there are 'experts' all over this site that can help you here  . and I am not even sure you realize how silly that question is ? 

 

How about  I explain color to you  , right here , when we are both color blind, using a black and white font and no color change option ....  hmmmmm ?

 

 

I am contrasting worldly 'happiness' with the bliss of the Self here.  What are you referring to !

 

I am referring to what I originally referred to when you popped up and started trying to refute it as you seem to think that any state above the happiness : unhappiness base line seems to threaten your 'Brahma'  icon .

 

 

 There are higher degrees of happiness like ecstasy and higher degrees of unhappiness too, like grief. But those who were grieving have also moved on to higher states of happiness as well and vice versa, clearly showing their nature of being opposites

 

yes and that is your other issue ;   I was staing that grief is a much higher scale than mere unhappiness , but that too started off another reaction , but now you appear to be agreeing with this .

 

its quiet simple ; if eudamonia state can exist within  any fluctuation of the happiness unhappiness base line , then it is above it .

 

The same as depression ; if it exists no matter how happy oir unhappy you are ... then it is below that baseline  ( I am trying to be rather unrealistically simple here for you)  .

 

Extreme happiness or extreme unhappiness are also opposites, if you want  to put it that way, for better comprehension.

 

If you had to tell me that ... you rally have not got what I have been talking about  ... you should really read my article ... but thats the thing , it can be supplied , but it can also be ignored and the misunderstood argument continue  .... ' thats life'  .

 

 

But the lower self is already established and considered to be illusory !  What is the truth or benchmark to contrast it with, as in the Self or Buddha nature or any description of your own !

 

I have  a 6 part A4 sheets stuck together with a schemata  for that ... I cant post it here .  briefly the 'lower self' is down the bottom of my diagram  ( which is based on a sort of adapted qabbalistic tree of life , with the sphere of Mars adjusted to its rightful position - considering psychology ) and consists of one of these triangular arrangements , representing the core of 'self' , the 'unconscious'  consisting of triangle around the Moon sphere with a  Venus : Mars baseline  with  Mercury at the apex . Mercury is also connected up through this triangle to the next one above through the Sun - mercury has that ability, to go through the 3 worlds ; heaven earth and hell , if one likes  , much like the power of the raven .  Then the unconscious begins to approach the Solar 'self' and the formation of the 'ego' begins , but all this is modified by the lowest sphere that it manifests in ; the environment , all coming together to create the personna .  It goes further up of course beyond the Sun  and looks at 'above ' or spiritual and and eventually cosmological influences , and also some spheres include genetic information that comes physically . And this is just a  small part of my 'what  constitutes the self ' schemata .

 

it was an interesting question you posed . but more worthy of its own thread . and it should be obvious I am contrary to the premise of this thread ; ie. YES there is  a state beyond the polarities  ... its just  that most of us are caught up in them .

 

and my systems are not just waffle, they are not only observable in nature nut applicable in nature , in all sorts of ways .

 

 Consider all the difficulties arguments and fights that can go on in a relationship , or just between men and women . No matter what you do , it will not be properly resolved   (unless one retires or gives up  their position... but that can hold inner resentment  ), one has to get off that Mars Venus baseline . archetypal opposition and rise to the Mercurial perspective and operate from there .

 

 

But I had asked what you understood by the Self, which is non-conceptual in nature. How can you talk about the conceptual illusory self then as an answer or reply!

You asked what I understood as the self   NOT what I understood as the  non conceptual self  .   Most people have some concept  about the self  .... no one has a concept about the non-conceptual self .

 

or maybe you do ?  Maybe you are some guru that can have concepts about  the non- conceptual ? 

Yes, I can see that.

 

 How can you talk of equating the Self with this or that when you don't even have a clue on what the true Self is, as per nondual or advaitan philosophy !

 

OH  well... exuuuuuuuse me   for sharing wisdom that is beyond your personal and cultural belief systems  ! 

 

 

 

How could YOU try to debate me on eudaimonia  when you don't even have a clue on what  it is , nor on its originating ancient Greek philosophy and its intersection with modern western psychology ? 

 

 

10 hours ago, Ajay0 said:

And how can you realistically expect me to answer your question related to the Self and Buddha nature, when you don't even know what they are in the first place, and have mere uncertain speculations to offer on what they are !

 

And now you are saying that one person can not answer another persons questions if the person that asked the question did not already know the answer  !     

 

and it was YOU that asked me that question !

 

.... DUDE !      

 

AND  I said   they can be the same IF they are both illusory ... which you danced around and avoided ... no wonder , as its an unassailable position .

 

Without understanding the basics, you will only jump to greater confusions and never-ending mazes of superficial speculation. Good luck with that. 

 

Ahhh ... thats the problem with you  ....... you might see better with your  sunglasses off .

 

 

[Nungali]

10 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@Michael Sternbach “The man who has a dig-pitting unit will most likely have a mobile phone in his pocket.”

 

—Sun Tzu, Twitter Post, 2018.

 

your comment on 22/08/23. “Alternatively, you can let the archaeologists of the far future excavate and build some outrageous theory about 21st century humans on you.” as an aside, are you implying that the findings of archaeological study in general are inaccurate? 

 

[i meant ‘pit-digging’, not ‘dog-pitting’… or did i..?]

 

nah ... he is implying that I am an 'inaccurate human ' . 

 

I think I  better wear a gold plaque around my neck wen I get buried  ;   " Not normal ! "

[Nungali]

10 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@Ajay0 your reply to Nungali on 21/08/23. “But that still comes under unhappiness ! “ Well you’re splitting-hairs again.

 

“What do you understand by the Self?” again, splitting-hairs: there is no self as distinct from the identity nor ego of your average homo-sapiens, no glorious transcended Buddha-nature beyond the filthy egos of the average person.

 

yes, valid for the average HSS .  But ... are you familiar with the concept of the 'Super-ego ' ?   It exists above the concept of the conscious : unconscious duality .

 

 

 

Everyone has a different shape of identity and each is as valid and as objectively ‘valuable’ as the last. i don’t think we’ll find any agreement here; i will say that in my my own field-of-view i cannot see any such distinction, and i think you have merely been told by proselytisers of these philosophies that such a distinction exists and have not witnessed it yourself; share your experience if you have; but then i will probably just say that you are confusing a Dualistic experience as a Non-Dual one, and are interpreting it as a Non-Dual one due to your indoctrination in these philosophies, and that you would not have interpreted it that way otherwise; but i cannot disprove you nor your belief and neither can you prove it.

 

Indeed -  our undeniable position is we are in duality ; even if we think we have got to a 'beyond duality' state , we are still in and doing that from duality .  Some say they enter the non-dual state in meditation or levels of awareness , but thois too is done from the state of duality .

 

The thing is the MIND can perceive the patterns of the ideal  ... 'above' duality .  BUT  , from the daoist perspective ,   we are still seeing the underlying duality ... we perceive FROM  the world of 'myriad forms' which is imprinted with the creative signature  ( 'carrying it on our backs and embracing it in our arms '   Ch 42 again TTC ) .  But above that ..... in the IDEAL world  - which we can only have 'ideas about'    -   there is still the original duality and above that ... ideally ... singularity .

 

One way to look at this  is to study the concepts of singularity in physics .... thats rather 'interesting' ... and of course  runs up against the same perceptual base problem .  Some interesting 'semantics' and juggling' there too .

 

and your first comment on 22/08/23 is probably the best example yet of belief in the ‘perpetual-bliss’.

 

your reply to Daniel on 22/08/23. these examples don’t necessitate a Non-Dual perception, rather they imply a broadening of awareness such that a greater level of harmony within one’s ‘life-sphere’ is temporarily achieved. i’ve discussed elsewhere in the thread about how you cannot, while maintaining logic, exist in both a Dualistic and Non-Dualistic state—such an existence would be just Dualistic ....

 

Or 'tripartite'  :  a dualistic perception , a dualistic perception of non dualism , and a further perception one gets  from  attempting both of those views .  In number theory we can look at it as consciousness or even 'God', or 'awareness' . let's call it a 'point' of manifestation / awareness .   One exists alone,  nothing except awareness .  It must , if aware of nothing else (as nothing else has come into existence yet ) be aware if itself , so it has an image or understanding of itself  , making two : the point itself and now  its view of or understanding of itself . These  two come together to make a third point  or  'some thing ' ; the self or point  (or 'God' if you like ) ,  its view of itself ; standing aside and looking back at the self , even in contemplation of the self , and the resultant of this . This is then 'projected out' as a 'less ideal' energy towards manifestation  ( the 10,000 things )

In my system the way to escape this  dualistic ping pong is not getting back to a non dual way  as that is impossible , but to get back to the triangular formation that existed before the creation of the 10,000 things  ( multitude of forms in physical creation ) which carry the signature of dualism within them .

 

(‘Dualstic state’ is one, ‘Non-Dualistic state’ another; giving us more than one thing).

 

There is no escape   

 

 

 

Also there would be no way back at all into the realm of Duality if you merged with the Non-Dual—as I’ve explained elsewhere, simply by being conscious you are in a Dualistic state, as an observer can only observe outside of itself. 

 

see my most recent reply to liminal_luke (of today’s date) for my stance on the ego.

 

yes, conflicts are necessarily Dualistic… how could there ever be conflict in a Unity?

 

Again, in the Non-Dual you would not be able to conceive of anything Dualistic at all, as to do so would automatically kick you out of the Non-Dual. 

 

Well, there are some non dual daobums masters here ... thing is they never make posts  .... its that black lettering on the white background nonsense ... they want none of that !    

 

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, Pak_Satrio said:

How will I ever recover?

 

Via alchemy ! 

 

V.I.T.R.I.O.L.  *       ( and we seem to be NOT lacking that from our new OP !     )

 

That is , just shove your head down deeper in the sand  as ;

 

*   Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem ,"

 

Explore the interior of earth  (or yourself ) and you might find the hidden  ( 'Philosopher's )  stone  that purifies .

 

Edited August 23, 2023 by Nungali

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, iinatti said:

 

I did mean to insult you, so glad it got through :  )  I am just a hedgehog, so am not really sure what people are saying.  I have found, however, that proselytizing about spiritual experiences makes one look foolish, and arguing about those that you don’t understand even more so.  Aren’t hedgehogs are entitled to their own worldview.

 

We dont got em down here .... wish we did .   They seem cute and friendly back yard critters .

 

We got these , but  rarely get a visit from them  , no where near as prolific as hedgies seem to be ;  'Echidna ' ... although the indigenous call the 'hedgehogs ' .... curious that .

 

here is a baby one ; an echidna 'poggle' ;

 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Nungali

[Mark Foote]

11 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@C T ok chief. i’ll let you have the last word, you need it
 

My favorite SF band of the eighties--Jack Cassidy of Jefferson Airplane fame joined a punk L.A. band and brought them back to San Francisco.
 

 

[Mark Foote]

12 hours ago, galen_burnett said:

@Mark Foote 20/08/23 yes the notion of an infinitely progressing and unfolding existence is interesting, which is what I think the idea of not being able to prove all mathematics implies; and I said in my reply to Daniel that I admit it could be the truth; just that it doesn’t make as much sense to me—with my current understanding—as my current model does. I could still fit my 50/50 pain-joy ratio in such a reality however, and could still deny ‘perpetual-bliss’ in it also.

 

your second comment of 20/08/23

 

“[…] speaks of the stopping of perceiving and feeling, and lays down that this belongs to happiness.” another sighting of the ‘elephant in the room’. so then perpetual cessation of ‘perception and feeling’ is striven for, leading to ‘perpetual happiness’.

 

 

By no means, perpetual.  Gautama said that there's a happiness inherent in all the states of concentration he outlined, including the "cessation of feeling and perceiving", which is either the last state of concentration or the transcending of the states of concentration--it's unclear which, from the sermons.  

Gautama said he spent most of his time in the first concentration, the one with thought "applied and sustained", especially in the rainy season (when he would have spent most of his time in meditation, I presume).  But none of the states of concentration are permanent.

Here's the way I understand the trick.  Once a cessation of volition in the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation has been arrived at, then a recollection of the overview of the body at the time of the cessation is sufficient to return to that concentration, as necessary.  A rhythm of thoughts applied and sustained is set up, a rhythm that includes thought of that cessation, and perhaps experience of that cessation.

 

There's a kind of peace in that rhythm of thought, and although there's no happiness apart from equanimity in that cessation, there is happiness both in the thought applied and sustained of the first state and in the cessation (the fourth state).

Not a bliss, and temporary states even if Gautama spent most of his time in the first of them.

For me, "laying hold of one-pointedness of mind" requires relaxation, calm, detachment, and presence.  To me, those are roughly the actionable elements of the sixteen thoughts "applied and sustained" that made up Gautama's way of living.  Also staying awake to see the placement of attention, the "one-pointedness", shift as a function of the movement of breath--but that's presence.

Not necessary to stay awake, of course.  I follow the placement of attention to fall asleep, every night.

I said "the trick".  The peace that I mentioned can affect others, affect their state of mind, and the presence involved can impress others.  Is it possible to convey to others the means to experience the cessation of volitive activity in the body in inhalation and exhalation, through words?  The Zen school says no.  I've got four people who might say otherwise, though they mostly experience the cessation in falling asleep.

 

 

Quote

 

“As I've said elsewhere, I think the notion of everlasting bliss is more of a Hindu or East Indian assumption than a Buddhist or Daoist one.” i think that differentiation between the Eastern philosophies is very dubious; and I’ve just quoted in this sequence of my replies a Buddhist explicitly saying that ‘perpetual bliss’ is attainable! And if then you are saying that perpetual cessation of ‘perception and feeling’ cannot be attained then what ratio of happiness-to-suffering is attainable in this model? 50%? 80%? 99%? In my view happiness and suffering balance in a 50/50 ratio and that is inviolable. If Buddhists think a higher ratio of happiness can be attained, well, then we just disagree.
 

There are folks out there who call themselves Buddhist, whose beliefs have little or nothing to do with the teachings of Gautama the Shakyan as recorded in the first four sermon collections of the Pali Canon.  Or whose teachings skirt the periphery, and never touch on "one-pointedness" or the concentrations as Gautama taught them.

 

I agree with Gautama that suffering is a matter of identification of an abiding self with phenomena of form, feeling, mind, habitual tendency, or consciousness, that seems true to me based on my experience.  Pain's another matter.  There are several accounts of followers of Gautama going to the bedside of an individual in pain, dying, and being unable to persuade that individual, a person who had at least in part mastered Gautama's teaching, to bear up with the pain--the person in pain took the knife, instead. 

Gautama was an ascetic for years, basically denying himself almost unto death.  Gautama attained the ceasing of volition in feeling and perceiving, which two of the foremost teachers of India in his day had not attained.  He was exceptional.  I'm only shooting for something more than the relationship with myself I had in high school.  Looks like I've succeeded (they voted me "most likely to succeed" in my high school, ironic).




 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Mark Foote