Transcendence vs Integration

[Bindi]

24 minutes ago, dwai said:

Beautiful! Nothing needs to be transcended - just realized  

“Just realising” runs the very real risk of falling into spiritual bypassing. 

Focusing solely on realisation allows you to dismiss unresolved emotional or karmic patterns as "illusory" or "not real," or “just stories”,  isn’t this the stance of nondualists?

 

While ‘realisation’ in the modern nondual sense may initially bring a sense of detachment, this can far too easily become a coping mechanism to avoid confronting painful emotions which remain active in the subconscious, sabotaging one's ability to fully integrate any ‘realisation’ into daily life. This is why I favour an integrative model which sees emotions and thoughts and karmic patterns as absolutely real and essential to address before ‘realisation’, in fact as the method for ‘realisation.’ 

[stirling]

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

This ‘story you tell yourself’ sounds mostly like samskaras. I agree they have to go, I just prefer to destroy them from their roots, and remove them completely. This takes a lot longer than transcending them, but I gain thoroughness, as well as identification with whatever then remains.

 

How do you go about destroying them at their roots? Do they no longer exist? We can drop our attachment or aversion to past events by understanding what they are, and why they formed in the practices we use. Eventually they just become memories that have no power to color experience. Fortunately you can do the same thing (taking much more time) using psychological processes, but my experience with both is that the net effect is precisely the same. 

 

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

Non-identification with the story you tell about yourself is liberating, but it would irk me that the causes of those stories remain. On the other hand complete liberation on all levels I find very appealing. 

 

I honestly don't know how anyone would remove the stories. It seems to me that they are just part of reality in the same way that history is. JFK will always have a murderer, our grandfathers will have died in WWII, and we all remember the child we were that experienced trauma. I see this part of liberation as being able to realize that reality is just how things are today, and not see the world through those traumas. 

[Nungali]

I often have to deal with or try to help others that have a 'fractured self'  and seem to have no 'model' or training in how to deal with that .

 

I spent New Year's Eve listening to and talking with a distraught mother  that has spent a week in her car , driving to and fro, searching for her son, finding him  and then driving him here and there , sleeping in the car and then shuttling between two regional hospital's psyche wards .   He is locked up in one now . She  has spent the last few days sitting around the ward , waiting for doctors who dont show up or promise to call but dont , defending him against wrong and bad medications and all of that nasty 'circus' in an overcrowded, understaffed  very strange environment .

 

She has a lot learning and skills in a 'spiritual tradition' but they have no teaching or techniques to deal with this .

 

I noticed with another person , he is very 'spiritual' and lauded by people because of that . I found out that the number of Vipassanas he has attended is, well,  at least excessive IMO .  But then he had to return to his old family environment  for a few days to sort out some 'probate business'.  He returned a mess , 'invaded'   totally shot down . In talking with him about it , he too had no idea how to deal with his problem .

 

And I have noticed some cases similar here too on DBs over the years .

 

Often , when its too late  then they want the advice, the practices, the techniques .  But it isnt an instant fix , especially by that stage .

 

But some have learnt  to deal with  it by themselves .   At one stage I was reviewing some source material   *  and then I watched a doco on homeless people with psychiatric problems . One, this young woman , what a psychological mess , which led to a bad physical mess and life as well .  But she managed to heal herself and  f me ! I realized  she had done the crucial things in the paper I was studying (it wasnt the first time I encountered this, in this paper , I had long experience with it in my practices  and the paper was a pleasant surprise as it was from a psychiatrist that worked 17 years in a state mental institution and he 'discovered ' the same  principles and ways to deal with these issues , within a medical  clinical environment ! )  , she did it with the help of her dog / companion .  I wont go  further into that , but its a demonstration that with the right underlying principles and realizations , the 'outer clothing' of 'management '  is less significant .

 

I have been enjoying reading and seeing the way Bindi manages it .   

 

*  This isnt really  starting point , the following is for people that have got into deep 'trouble' with it ;

 

http://www.theisticpsychology.org/books/w.vandusen/presence_spirits.htm

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

“Just realising” runs the very real risk of falling into spiritual bypassing. 

Focusing solely on realisation allows you to dismiss unresolved emotional or karmic patterns as "illusory" or "not real," or “just stories”,  isn’t this the stance of nondualists?

“Unreal” is only apparent after realization. That’s why they say, before realization there are only questions but no answers. After realization there are no questions. The term “illusory” is a mischaracterization. When Advaita Vedanta says the transactional world is “unreal” we have to understand what reality means. It doesn’t mean the transactional world is non-existent, it only means that it is temporary/transitory, and therefore “unreal” in comparison to the absolute reality (that is the Self/consciousness) that doesn’t change. 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

While ‘realisation’ in the modern nondual sense may initially bring a sense of detachment, this can far too easily become a coping mechanism to avoid confronting painful emotions which remain active in the subconscious, sabotaging one's ability to fully integrate any ‘realisation’ into daily life. This is why I favour an integrative model which sees emotions and thoughts and karmic patterns as absolutely real and essential to address before ‘realisation’, in fact as the method for ‘realisation.’ 

That is from your perspective without having realized (assuming you haven't had that switch happen).  All these doubts and concerns fall away when that happens. The transactional world is not negated by realization, rather one becomes better equipped to deal with anything one experiences in the transactional world. 

[Nungali]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

“Just realising” runs the very real risk of falling into spiritual bypassing. 

Focusing solely on realisation allows you to dismiss unresolved emotional or karmic patterns as "illusory" or "not real," or “just stories”,  isn’t this the stance of nondualists?

 

While ‘realisation’ in the modern nondual sense may initially bring a sense of detachment, this can far too easily become a coping mechanism to avoid confronting painful emotions which remain active in the subconscious, sabotaging one's ability to fully integrate any ‘realisation’ into daily life. This is why I favour an integrative model which sees emotions and thoughts and karmic patterns as absolutely real and essential to address before ‘realisation’, in fact as the method for ‘realisation.’ 

 

When I mentioned you in the above post , I was going to use the term  ' the way Bindi integrated her 'self'  / 'selves' .

[old3bob]

3 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Bob can't hurt my feelings... I just don't know what he means, or is referring to.

 

 

throwing the baby out with the bath water is a downer.

[Bindi]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

How do you go about destroying them at their roots? Do they no longer exist? We can drop our attachment or aversion to past events by understanding what they are, and why they formed in the practices we use. Eventually they just become memories that have no power to color experience. Fortunately you can do the same thing (taking much more time) using psychological processes, but my experience with both is that the net effect is precisely the same. 

 

I don’t think dropping attachment will give the same net result as a good psychological process. A blocked emotion is an energetic block in the subtle body, and enough blocks cause energy to literally stop flowing in certain channels. Dropping attachment to the blocks doesn’t remove the blocks. If dropping aversion to painful emotions allows you to feel these emotions through to their natural dissolution, then I agree dropping aversion in this way will have the same net effect as psychological processes.

 

2 hours ago, stirling said:

I honestly don't know how anyone would remove the stories. It seems to me that they are just part of reality in the same way that history is. JFK will always have a murderer, our grandfathers will have died in WWII, and we all remember the child we were that experienced trauma. I see this part of liberation as being able to realize that reality is just how things are today, and not see the world through those traumas. 
 

 

 

Samskaras are the mental and emotional patterns that influence our perceptions and behaviours, giving rise to our personal stories. Karma sets up our samskaras. Both can be removed entirely when kundalini rises through the central channel at the right time, with the right preconditions in place. At the same time, it’s kundalini’s role to consecutively cut through attachment to the body, emotional attachments, and ego. At this point, how you comprehend the historical story will be very different to someone lost in their stories. It seems to me that nondual philosophies start at the last step, teaching how to cut through attachment to the body, emotional attachments and ego. It’s a top down approach that misses the removal of karma and samskaras at their roots. 

 

[Bindi]

5 hours ago, dwai said:

“Unreal” is only apparent after realization. That’s why they say, before realization there are only questions but no answers. After realization there are no questions. The term “illusory” is a mischaracterization. When Advaita Vedanta says the transactional world is “unreal” we have to understand what reality means. It doesn’t mean the transactional world is non-existent, it only means that it is temporary/transitory, and therefore “unreal” in comparison to the absolute reality (that is the Self/consciousness) that doesn’t change. 
 

 

The transactional world may be transitory, but it nonetheless impacts the Self, as it is the Self that is caught in the grip of karma. While the Self might remain inherently unperturbed in its essence, the experience of karma still shapes its expression in the subtle and causal realms.

 

Firstly, samskaras will continue to arise in the subtle body, regardless of one’s attitude toward them, until they are fully resolved. Secondly, the Self cannot evolve while bound by unresolved karmic patterns.

 

To me this concept, the Self evolving, is expressed in Neidan when it describes the requirements when the Immortal embryo or spiritual child is found. Unlike spiritual systems that view realisation or transcendence as an endpoint, Neidan cautions that the child must mature before it can "go out into the world." 

This perspective portrays the Immortal embryo as dynamic and capable of growth, it also suggests that at some point the mature ‘Immortal Spirit’ is capable of bridging the ‘spiritual’ and transactional realms, which is a perfectly integrated outcome. 

 

Quote

That is from your perspective without having realized (assuming you haven't had that switch happen).  All these doubts and concerns fall away when that happens. The transactional world is not negated by realization, rather one becomes better equipped to deal with anything one experiences in the transactional world. 

 

Edited Wednesday at 09:42 AM by Bindi

[dwai]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

The transactional world may be transitory, but it nonetheless impacts the Self, as it is the Self that is caught in the grip of karma. While the Self might remain inherently unperturbed in its essence, the experience of karma still shapes its expression in the subtle and causal realms.

The Self is not affected by anything. All things rise and fall in the Self. You’re basically mixing concepts up. 

[old3bob]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

The transactional world may be transitory, but it nonetheless impacts the Self, as it is the Self that is caught in the grip of karma. While the Self might remain inherently unperturbed in its essence, the experience of karma still shapes its expression in the subtle and causal realms.

 

Firstly, samskaras will continue to arise in the subtle body, regardless of one’s attitude toward them, until they are fully resolved. Secondly, the Self cannot evolve while bound by unresolved karmic patterns.

 

To me this concept, the Self evolving, is expressed in Neidan when it describes the requirements when the Immortal embryo or spiritual child is found. Unlike spiritual systems that view realisation or transcendence as an endpoint, Neidan cautions that the child must mature before it can "go out into the world." 

This perspective portrays the Immortal embryo as dynamic and capable of growth, it also suggests that at some point the mature ‘Immortal Spirit’ is capable of bridging the ‘spiritual’ and transactional realms, which is a perfectly integrated outcome. 

 

 

 

My take: Soul body evolves,  Self does not for if it did then it could also devolve and perish.  There is only one Self in all souls or selves not quad trillions times whatever number of unique Self's like there are souls, whether they are young or ancient "immortals" in the cosmic cycles, cycles which are very far beyond our earth time.  Some schools deny the soul which is throwing the baby out with the bath water to me.

Edited Wednesday at 10:18 AM by old3bob

[Bindi]

19 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

My take: Soul body evolves,  Self does not for if it did then it could also devolve and perish.  There is only one Self in all souls or selves not quad trillions times whatever number of unique Self's like there are souls, whether they are young or ancient "immortals" in the cosmic cycles, cycles which are very far beyond our earth time.  Some schools deny the soul which is throwing the baby out with the bath water to me.

If the soul body is equated with the causal body, then I would fully accept that what I am referring to is the soul. The way you put it sounds like the idea of God, one God in all souls, not quadrillion gods, I have no problem with this. 

[old3bob]

 

yes, btw. the term "God" can be problematic per projections of the mind, while the Self is not of the mind nor bound by realms of the mind.  (with "mind" being another one of those terms that needs to be agreed upon as to its meaning for folks to see eye to eye)

Edited Wednesday at 10:50 AM by old3bob

[johndoe2012]

11 hours ago, Bindi said:

“Just realising” runs the very real risk of falling into spiritual bypassing. 

Focusing solely on realisation allows you to dismiss unresolved emotional or karmic patterns as "illusory" or "not real," or “just stories”,  isn’t this the stance of nondualists?

 

While ‘realisation’ in the modern nondual sense may initially bring a sense of detachment, this can far too easily become a coping mechanism to avoid confronting painful emotions which remain active in the subconscious, sabotaging one's ability to fully integrate any ‘realisation’ into daily life. This is why I favour an integrative model which sees emotions and thoughts and karmic patterns as absolutely real and essential to address before ‘realisation’, in fact as the method for ‘realisation.’ 

 

True. 

 

Childhood trauma can be very deep and require years of healing and therapy to release. 

 

It is not just a story, it is deeply embedded in the body and someone who is honest will know it because they feel deeply bound by it.

 

The tension that comes up in relationships will make you honest and non dual bypassing will feel totally fake. 

 

However, stirling does not recommend bypassing but actually work with it in meditation. 

 

Just healing issues blindly with no view however can lead you astray.

 

The non dual view is helpful in correcting the underlying beliefs of a fixed self in a hostile world. So it is like riding a bicycle. 

 

The view is the direction. The healing is necessary for getting to the goal. 

 

[blue eyed snake]

On 30-12-2024 at 11:53 PM, Bindi said:

 

This makes me think of an experience I once had of thoughts suddenly being ‘unstuck’, it was brought on after being in emotional pain and it was a huge relief because I had been very entangled in my thoughts and emotions at that point.

what an interesting experience that must have been, never had something like that .

 

On 30-12-2024 at 11:53 PM, Bindi said:

It too stopped, like your nondual experience, it only lasted a couple of days, so I fully agree we can have these experiences,

perhaps in moments of severe stress,

 

but these experiences were not alike, yours was during heightened stress, mine occurred during deep relaxation, i think the neigung people around here would call it sung. Seems to me it's not useful to compare them as if they are sort of the same.

 

On 30-12-2024 at 11:53 PM, Bindi said:

but what these experiences mean is something we may disagree about, in fact we most likely would disagree. I see it as a pressure valve that gave me some relief in the moment,

 

good you had relief

 

On 30-12-2024 at 11:53 PM, Bindi said:

 

but not a state that I needed to re-engineer, for example via meditation or whatever.

 

after the first months of chigung there has never been any engineering or re-engineering. 't looks like the years of chigung practice have started a process that slowly unfolds, layer after layer changes. I have not done any formal practice for many years, but still things unfold and the sense of ' me-ness' change. it's interesting to observe that.

In fact I never intended to follow any path and i do not adhere to any particular philosophy. Making up my own vocabulary for ' experiences' . Reading here, there are posts that seem to describe recognizable 'states of being' and then I use those words to be able to communicate. There are no people to talk about these things in my daily life s it's nice to be on this forum.

 

But it's all just words, the experiences realy cannot be caught in words, or so it seems to me.

 

On 30-12-2024 at 11:53 PM, Bindi said:

 

I suspect it might be one of the outcomes of my journey, but only one aspect, and not the method of my journey. I don’t discount your experience at all, but I do question how you interpret that experience as part of the whole. I question whether disidentifying with the story before being ‘whole’ is beneficial or if it actually leads to splintering of wholeness. I don’t mean to offend you, I’m just trying to explain my position. 

 

no offense meant and no offence taken.

wil try to explain my position too

 

i've spent decades of my life with doing psychotherapy every once in a while, trying to unravel the things that happened in my life, how they've affected me, how to live with that,how to become more mentally healthy. It did not however, touch on the trauma i carried deep within. In other words, it did not touch on the biggest blockage, chigung, or my teacher, or the combination did that.

It felt as if a cork was pulled from my innards. After that i was sucked into what some call the spiritual path, i do not do that, i did not want it.

It just happens.

 

in the same way i started to disidentify with the body as the 'me-ness' after a near death experience as a teen,  Disidentification with the ego/ the stories started to unfold. Not as a belief, an act of will, or by following a set of instruction or a particular practice, it just happened.

over the last years i find that the sense of 'me-ness' more often resides in the bubble around me.

 

not able to explain that and not interested in doing that either, just observing.

 

On 30-12-2024 at 11:53 PM, Bindi said:

I have come to the same conclusion about karma. 

 

[stirling]

13 hours ago, old3bob said:

throwing the baby out with the bath water is a downer.

 

Yeah... I'm still lost. Have a lovely day Bob. 

[old3bob]

16 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

Yeah... I'm still lost. Have a lovely day Bob. 

 

espousing stuff like the following quote and not realizing it is a hardcore downer is revealing;

(and fancy sounding two stepping  won't erase that)

 

"Sure. In my opinion paths, practices, models, traditions and religions are entirely conceptual and do not precipitate "awakening". It is very often dropping the methods and practices that creates the opening. Many traditions acknowledge this..."   Stirling

 

many traditions don't resort to grandiose or foolish denials or throw the baby out with the bathwater, got it?

Edited Wednesday at 06:05 PM by old3bob

[stirling]

12 hours ago, Bindi said:

I don’t think dropping attachment will give the same net result as a good psychological process. A blocked emotion is an energetic block in the subtle body, and enough blocks cause energy to literally stop flowing in certain channels. Dropping attachment to the blocks doesn’t remove the blocks. If dropping aversion to painful emotions allows you to feel these emotions through to their natural dissolution, then I agree dropping aversion in this way will have the same net effect as psychological processes.

 

You might have a different experience, but, speaking for myself, I worked through a lot more trauma in meditation than counselors offices. What would natural dissolution mean to you?

 

12 hours ago, Bindi said:

Samskaras are the mental and emotional patterns that influence our perceptions and behaviours, giving rise to our personal stories. Karma sets up our samskaras. Both can be removed entirely when kundalini rises through the central channel at the right time, with the right preconditions in place.

 

By "removed", do you mean that they no longer effect your behavior?

 

12 hours ago, Bindi said:

At the same time, it’s kundalini’s role to consecutively cut through attachment to the body, emotional attachments, and ego. At this point, how you comprehend the historical story will be very different to someone lost in their stories. It seems to me that nondual philosophies start at the last step, teaching how to cut through attachment to the body, emotional attachments and ego. It’s a top down approach that misses the removal of karma and samskaras at their roots. 

 

I see what you mean now. One could decide that kundalini is somehow necessary, or is present in both processes, but I have never seen evidence of it in this context, and am unsure that kundalini has been a real feature in my path besides on particularly interesting episode, which might have been kundalini, or not. 

[stirling]

53 minutes ago, old3bob said:

espousing stuff like the following quote and not realizing it is a hardcore downer is revealing;

(and fancy sounding two stepping  won't erase that)

 

"Sure. In my opinion paths, practices, models, traditions and religions are entirely conceptual and do not precipitate "awakening". It is very often dropping the methods and practices that creates the opening. Many traditions acknowledge this..."   Stirling

 

many traditions don't resort to grandiose or foolish denials or throw the baby out with the bathwater, got it?

 

I'm sorry the idea upsets you. Isn't it "grace" that enlightens in many of the Hindu (and Sufi) philosophies? What you can do ahead of that is prepare the playing field. Practices can get the mind to the point where it is receptive, open and spacious. The openings for realization tend to happen where there is this stillness, in my experience. 

[old3bob]

1 hour ago, stirling said:

 

I'm sorry the idea upsets you. Isn't it "grace" that enlightens in many of the Hindu (and Sufi) philosophies? What you can do ahead of that is prepare the playing field. Practices can get the mind to the point where it is receptive, open and spacious. The openings for realization tend to happen where there is this stillness, in my experience. 

 

holy  cow, contradicting yourself doesn't erase that either....

[stirling]

5 hours ago, old3bob said:

holy  cow, contradicting yourself doesn't erase that either....

 

Well... it was nice to briefly understand what you were talking about, but you've made yourself inscrutable again. My hat's off to you... you truly are an enigma, Bob.

[Bindi]

6 hours ago, stirling said:

 

You might have a different experience, but, speaking for myself, I worked through a lot more trauma in meditation than counselors offices. What would natural dissolution mean to you?

 

 

By "removed", do you mean that they no longer effect your behavior?
 

 

By removed I mean samskaras as energetic distortions in the subtle or energy body are both brought up and erased by kundalini energy (and consciousness working together), it’s one part of an innate energy purification system, they no longer affect behaviour because they no longer exist. This process, which can be equated with the cutting of the granthis, slowly dismantles the egoic framework that obscures the True Self or Original Self. Bob suggests that what is being revealed after this dismantling of the egoic framework is actually the soul, I’m not prepared to state the name of what is revealed but it is an original essence that itself has been restricted and gripped by karma until it too is freed in the kundalini process. All of this just leaves one to act from an unconditioned baseline, but it also links the awareness of this original essence to our conscious minds, it’s a fundamental reorienting of the entire system. 

 

6 hours ago, stirling said:

 

I see what you mean now. One could decide that kundalini is somehow necessary, or is present in both processes, but I have never seen evidence of it in this context, and am unsure that kundalini has been a real feature in my path besides on particularly interesting episode, which might have been kundalini, or not. 

I am aware that kundalini is seen as irrelevant in nondual frameworks, in general I think kundalini itself has not been fully understood, neither it’s part in spiritual growth nor how to work with it properly. This is just how it is, as long as we don’t wipe ourselves out as a species I think we will get to understand kundalini dynamics fully and learn how to work with it properly. 
 

 

[Bindi]

19 hours ago, dwai said:

The Self is not affected by anything. All things rise and fall in the Self. You’re basically mixing concepts up. 

Probably we need to clarify what I’m talking about. Bob suggests the personal soul, if that is an appropriate word then I am happy to call it that. The only thing I have come across in my experience that seems to be not affected by anything is three guides or entities that attend the ‘spirit child’ that was caught in the grip of karma in the causal body. Finding resonances in daoism I am reminded of the three hun spirits. The Daoist framework is a better overall fit for my experience, though some Indian concepts and words are perfect descriptions of some subtle body processes. 
 

Edited Thursday at 05:22 AM by Bindi

[old3bob]

2 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Well... it was nice to briefly understand what you were talking about, but you've made yourself inscrutable again. My hat's off to you... you truly are an enigma, Bob.

 

 

no, no, no

Edited Thursday at 03:50 AM by old3bob

[Bindi]

I’ve been doing some reading about the soul, the ‘True Self’ and karma. Very briefly: Advaita Vedanta sees the True Self as ultimately unaffected by karma, but many other Indian philosophical systems - such as Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaishnavism, Jainism, and certain branches of Buddhism - view the soul (Jiva) or the individual self as being caught in the grip of karma. In these systems, karma is a significant force that binds the soul to the material world and samsara, and liberation involves resolving or transcending this karmic entanglement through various means such as knowledge, devotion, or ethical practices.

 

So @3bob, I think calling what I’m talking about the ‘soul’ is spot on 👍

 

 

[dwai]

11 minutes ago, Bindi said:

I’ve been doing some reading about the soul, the ‘True Self’ and karma. Very briefly: Advaita Vedanta sees the True Self as ultimately unaffected by karma, but many other Indian philosophical systems - such as Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaishnavism, Jainism, and certain branches of Buddhism - view the soul (Jiva) or the individual self as being caught in the grip of karma. In these systems, karma is a significant force that binds the soul to the material world and samsara, and liberation involves resolving or transcending this karmic entanglement through various means such as knowledge, devotion, or ethical practices.

 

So @3bob, I think calling what I’m talking about the ‘soul’ is spot on 👍

 

 

The Self literally translates to Atman. Jiva literally means the living being (is born and therefore dies).  what you’re calling the soul is basically the subtle body (sukshma/linga sharira) that transmigrates between lifetimes. 
 

Now there are many conceptualizations of what Atman really is, based on varying interpretations of the Upanishads - dualistic, qualified monistic as well as non-dualistic.