Is a nondual realisation equivalent to a kundalini activation?

[old3bob]

how many folks would accept that there is only one of us in all of us,  being that it seems some want to be independent super dupers...

Edited March 20 by old3bob

[idiot_stimpy]

2 hours ago, old3bob said:

how many folks would accept that there is only one of us in all of us,  being that it seems some want to be independent super dupers...

 

I agree, it's the manifestation of the one being. Many years ago I had a mystical experience of this during mediation. I remember fondly thinking if I marry someone I'll just be marrying myself.

 

Your reply prompted me to remember. Unfortunately like other mystical experiences afterwards it drops back to normal consciousness.

[dwai]

There was an interesting development in the past two days with an old friend (also a former TDB - which I guess is a misnomer because "once a Dao bum, always a dao bum") wrote to me about his realization and the falling away of the sense of self which he described as "a dissolving into everything,  which can be interpreted as losing oneself).

I asked him, "Are YOU disappearing or is the personality who answers to the name 'Former TDB' disappearing?"

 

Because the original YOU has never not been there (or is always present, ever-shining). Only that it was clouded by the layers of personality that identify as this and that. Once there is a sufficient stillness developed, that One becomes apparent for what it has always/already been - Existence, Consciousness, Joy/Bliss (Sat, Chit, Ananda). 

 

I shared with him this snippet from James Swartz --

 

Spoiler

Question: Will there be suffering, as long as I have an ego?

 

You have an ego until the day the body dies. Vedanta, however, says the problem isn't ego but the "sense of doership" that the ego, which is a conscious entity, entertains. The feeling that I am doing something disappears when you see clearly that action requires many factors working together, the senses, mind, intellect, autonomic nervous system, etc. not to mention macrocosmic factors. At that point the anxiety the ego feels as it works out its karma disappears and it becomes a very relaxed ego. It doesn't suffer. Suffering is just the mental emotional load that comes with taking responsibility for what is happening in the field of karma. Anyway, when it realizes that stress is gratuitous, it does action happily, not for happiness, without the feeling that it is doing anything.

 

[dwai]

3 hours ago, old3bob said:

how many folks would accept that there is only one of us in all of us,  being that it seems some want to be independent super dupers...

What can be more "independent" super duper than that which is only One in all of us?

[old3bob]

30 minutes ago, dwai said:

What can be more "independent" super duper than that which is only One in all of us?

 

meaning there are not really a bunch of independent super dupers from each other with there own designs with the realization of Self

[dwai]

27 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

meaning there are not really a bunch of independent super dupers from each other with there own designs with the realization of Self

Exactly, there is only One

[Apech]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

There was an interesting development in the past two days with an old friend (also a former TDB - which I guess is a misnomer because "once a Dao bum, always a dao bum") wrote to me about his realization and the falling away of the sense of self which he described as "a dissolving into everything,  which can be interpreted as losing oneself).

I asked him, "Are YOU disappearing or is the personality who answers to the name 'Former TDB' disappearing?"

 

Because the original YOU has never not been there (or is always present, ever-shining). Only that it was clouded by the layers of personality that identify as this and that. Once there is a sufficient stillness developed, that One becomes apparent for what it has always/already been - Existence, Consciousness, Joy/Bliss (Sat, Chit, Ananda). 

 

I shared with him this snippet from James Swartz --

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Question: Will there be suffering, as long as I have an ego?

 

You have an ego until the day the body dies. Vedanta, however, says the problem isn't ego but the "sense of doership" that the ego, which is a conscious entity, entertains. The feeling that I am doing something disappears when you see clearly that action requires many factors working together, the senses, mind, intellect, autonomic nervous system, etc. not to mention macrocosmic factors. At that point the anxiety the ego feels as it works out its karma disappears and it becomes a very relaxed ego. It doesn't suffer. Suffering is just the mental emotional load that comes with taking responsibility for what is happening in the field of karma. Anyway, when it realizes that stress is gratuitous, it does action happily, not for happiness, without the feeling that it is doing anything.

 

How is Jeff these days?

[old3bob]

16 hours ago, Bindi said:

Another perspective on nonduality:

 

“In the Upanishads the [spiritual] heart is described as a secret place (guha), the cave of the heart. It is a small space, dahara akasha, in which the entire universe is held in seed form. Once we draw our awareness there we become one with all. We move from the individual to the universal.” https://www.vedanet.com/releasing-the-knots-of-the-heart-hridaya-granthi/

 

 But… if kundalini has previously become stable at the heart level, then mundane self-consciousness identification can shift to kundalini consciousness identification there. Identification as a higher consciousness. To me nondual awareness is missing the “I” passenger, an empty unguided rocket fired off into space. 

 

 

I'd say that last sentence is more or true if taken as or is based only on a conceptional/intellectual manifesto which most anyone could spin up. (and which btw. could have certain value at that level)  Anyway from many of your posts Bindi  it sounds like you're striving to put  most "non-duality" people or schools in the same and incomplete pot as that?  Whereas true non-duality realization (aka. as Self realization in the small lotus of the heart as pointed to in the Upanishads or some other teachings) does not and can not be limited in that way; namely empty of meaning and as an "unguided rocket fired off into space".

Edited March 20 by old3bob

[dwai]

30 minutes ago, Apech said:

How is Jeff these days?

No idea

 

[Apech]

10 minutes ago, dwai said:

No idea

 

ok I never was any good at fishing.

[dwai]

40 minutes ago, Apech said:

ok I never was any good at fishing.

[Bindi]

2 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

I'd say that last sentence is more or true if taken as or is based only on a conceptional/intellectual manifesto which most anyone could spin up. (and which btw. could have certain value at that level)  Anyway from many of your posts Bindi  it sounds like you're striving to put  most "non-duality" people or schools in the same and incomplete pot as that?  Whereas true non-duality realization (aka. as Self realization in the small lotus of the heart as pointed to in the Upanishads or some other teachings) does not and can not be limited in that way; namely empty of meaning and as an "unguided rocket fired off into space".

 

I am aware of a higher consciousness that has the potential to actively command forces within us that are currently locked away, milling around behind closed doors waiting for orders. Nonduality doesn’t acknowledge these forces, so it doesn’t offer a way to unlock them.  Nondualism is a sewn up system, any desire to shift away from it is philosophically defeated immediately as it decries desire, it is actually restrictive and if believed works against the unfolding of the subtle energy system. 
 

[Bindi]

Double post

Edited March 20 by Bindi

[Bindi]

40 minutes ago, Bindi said:

The ‘anatomical’ model of enlightenment includes the idea that there is a channel from the Heart-centre to the brain (the jivanadi) through which the ‘I’-thought travels to the brain and back. Bhagavan accepted this and used it to critique traditional yoga practices which sought realisation by doing exercises that made the kundalini rise from the muladhara to the sahasrara chakra. He maintained that realisation would only result if the kundalini was brought down to the Heart centre

 

The way I see it kundalini doesn’t naturally rise above the heart centre unless it is interfered with by the mind and hard methods, until it is meant to. What I do agree with is that something important happens in the heart centre associated with kundalini. 

 

40 minutes ago, Bindi said:

through the jivanadi, and he sometimes added that since self-enquiry would achieve this automatically, specific yogic exercises to achieve this goal were not needed.
 

Both Lakshmana Swamy and Saradamma have spoken of experiencing this jivanadi (they call it the amritanadi) and both support, on the basis of their direct experience of this channel, Bhagavan’s assertion that the individual ‘I’ rises and falls through this channel. In Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, Bhagavan was specifically asked if this jivanadi was real or not:

Question: Is the Jivanadi an entity or a figment of the imagination?

Bhagavan: The yogis say that there is a nadi called the jivanadi, atmanadi or paranadi. The Upanishadsspeak of a centre from which thousands of nadis branch off. Some locate such a centre in the brain and others in other centres. The Garbhopanishad traces the formation of the foetus and the growth of the child in the womb. The jiva is considered to enter the child through the fontanelle in the seventh month of its growth. In evidence thereof it is pointed out that the fontanelle is tender in a baby and is also seen to pulsate. It takes some months for it to ossify. Thus the jiva comes from above, enters through the fontanelle and works through the thousands of the nadis which are spread over the whole body. Therefore the seeker of Truth must concentrate on the sahasrara, that is the brain, in order to regain his source. Pranayama is said to help the yogi to rouse the kundalini sakti which lies coiled in the solar plexus. The sakti rises through a nerve called the sushumna, which is embedded in the core of the spinal cord and extends to the brain.

If one concentrates on the sahasrara there is no doubt that the ecstasy of samadhi ensues. The vasanas, that is the latencies, are not however destroyed. The yogi is therefore bound to wake up from the samadhi, because release from bondage has not yet been accomplished. He must still try to eradicate the vasanas in order that the latencies yet inherent in him may not disturb the peace of his samadhi. So he passes down from the sahasrara to the heart through what is called the jivanadi, which is only a continuation of the Sushumna. The sushumna is thus a curve. It starts from the solar plexus, rises through the spinal cord to the brain and from there bends down and ends in the heart. When the yogi has reached the heart, the samadhi becomes permanent. Thus we see that the heart is the final centre. (Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, talk no. 616)

My feeling from reading this is that Bhagavan is describing a real process, not something metaphorical or figurative.

 

https://www.davidgodman.org/the-role-of-the-heart-centre-in-self-realisation/

 

 

[Apech]

1 minute ago, Bindi said:

 

The way I see it kundalini doesn’t naturally rise above the heart centre unless it is interfered with by the mind and hard methods, until it is meant to. What I do agree with is that something important happens in the heart centre associated with kundalini. 

 

 

 

You know what they say about people who reply to their own posts?

[doc benway]

29 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

You know what they say about people who reply to their own posts?

 

They’re not two?

[Apech]

6 minutes ago, steve said:

 

They’re not two?

exactly

[dwai]

9 minutes ago, Apech said:

exactly

I have a friend whose name is Juan. We often say we are all Juan with Juan 

[Apech]

23 minutes ago, dwai said:

I have a friend whose name is Juan. We often say we are all Juan with Juan 

…and Juan actually found that funny the first thirteen times ….

[dwai]

7 minutes ago, Apech said:

…and Juan actually found that funny the first thirteen times ….

The juan is mysterious that way 

[old3bob]

 

some of us remember this variation on one...(and I was never much into bell bottom pants  )

 

 

[stirling]

10 hours ago, steve said:

I really appreciate your sharing.

I’d like to offer my perspective on the subtle point of “deepening” of “non-dual perception or understanding” fwiw. I propose that deepening, understanding, and perception are unrelated to non-duality but are related to the self, as the nature of mind is beyond all such concepts and is unimputable. What this sense of deepening of understanding and perception represents is the continual release of subtle remnants of self, which are never completely gone in this lifetime with, perhaps, very rare exception. Even when we feel free of the constraints of self, it is there in increasingly subtle forms. It is that very release of these myriad aspects of self which give rise to the equally varied experiences of awakening.

Just my $.02, ymmv.

I know just what you mean. I think about this too. IMHO it really can't be overstated that any model we might develop for enlightened mind simply fails to properly capture it or make sense, INCLUDING all of the well-known traditions. This is why we don't need the "raft" of the Buddha dharma once we have crossed the river (Alagaddupama (Water Snake Simile) Sutta). The destination doesn't properly correlate to all of the teachings we needed to get there. This is why, IMHO we have SO many different perspectives on what this "enlightenment" is. All that we can do is look for where those pointers converge ,of course.

 

Quote

“The awakened mind is turned upside down and does not accord even with the Buddha-wisdom.” - Hui Hai

 

There is a point (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_awakening#Arahant) where it is permanently understood that "self" is just another object in consciousness, not any kind of personal identity. Somewhere around this point, from my perspective, is where the delusion/duality of self drops away entirely and mind settles into more or less permanent non-meditation (the formlessness of 5th or 6th jhana). At this point the "self" no longer accumulates karma, since it isn't an identity and has no "self-view". 

 

After this point, the deepening I am speaking of is mostly due to the dissolving of dualities, which seems like it could be endless. Most of the time at this point, for the most part,  I couldn't even tell you WHAT is deepening or what new insight it manifests, though there is still a general perception of things slowly and gently increasing in clarity along a number of fronts. 

 

I agree with you that "emptiness" is already enlightened, and of course so are all appearances in consciousness including other "sentient beings"... including "us". Therefore, what we have left is Nirvana with "residue":

 

Quote

Sa-upādisesa-nibbāna (Pali; Sanskrit sopadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa), "nirvana with remainder", "nirvana with residue." Nirvana is attained during one's life, when the fires are extinguished. There is still the "residue" of the five skandhas, and a "residue of fuel", which however is not "burning". Nirvana-in-this-life is believed to result in a transformed mind with qualities such as happiness, freedom of negative mental states, peacefulness, and non-reactiveness.

 

An-up ādisesa-nibbāna (Pali; Sanskrit nir-upadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa), "nirvana without remainder," "nirvana without residue". This is the final nirvana, or parinirvana or "blowing out" at the moment of death, when there is no fuel left.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)#Nirvana_with_and_without_remainder_of_fuel

[liminal_luke]

,,,

 

Edited March 21 by liminal_luke

[old3bob]

 

The term non-dualism (also the terms qualified non-dualism and duality) have been around for a very long time in traditional "eastern" ways!   Meaning a very long time before some or certain "western" intellectuals or wana-be types co-opted it and set up schools of dubious doctrine;  so does that now mean that all non-dualists are in the same pot as that?  I'd say no by a long shot; and granted proven precautions need be taken with teachers and schools but neither are all yogi's,  guru's, Christians, shrinks, etc..  in the same pots because some have co-opted aspects of those teachings for ego driven designs, or fanatical like misunderstandings,  thus we have some bad apples making the all the barrels look bad.   Such has come into play for just about every "way" that has come down the pike but to me that doesn't mean being a die-hard cynic about such situations is the best course to take, and I think its fair to ask where will such an attitude get a person?

 

Btw, there is a saying in Buddhism that I don't fully remember at the moment along the lines of: "no blame"  and also one in Taoism along the lines of not striving with others fosters no blame.

Any one should feel free to further propound on those sayings if they'd like to since its early in the morning here and I'm not that up on them anyway...

 

 

Edited March 21 by old3bob

[dwai]