Transcendence vs Integration

[Bindi]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

 

Yes it is in spirituality. When I wholeheartedly embraced the ‘black’, it eventually became equal to ‘white’; integration = transcendence.

 

 

Black and white are equal in value but distinct in essence. 

 

[Bindi]

7 hours ago, old3bob said:

there is chipping away on the inside of a shell to get out, there is also a chipping away on the outside of that shell for freedom.  (are the chippers really the same but in different phases?)

 

 

I think there is something chipping away from the outside, which has been labelled the Atman or the Original Spirit. Something that can see the big picture, and what we have to do to “get out.” Connecting with this voice is challenging, I chose to try and hear this voice in my dreams, and I’ve found its directions to be indispensable. 

[stirling]

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

The idea that you could actually process karma via a mentally clouded and emotionally reactive mind within a few weeks or a month is laughable. Identifying with awareness rather than the self changes the goal posts, and this may indeed take a few weeks or a month if the mind is willing to follow this path, but karma itself is untouched.

 

If you step on a snail and feel guilty, realizing that it happened without intent could be enough for you to drop your feelings about it. This could happen in a few seconds. 

 

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

“examining their roots” sounds like a mental endeavour?

 

Realizing what your attachment or aversion to something is usually arises as an "aha" moment. I have students write down the major emotional traumas they can remember in a notebook for their own use. Most traumas beyond them correspond to one or another of them. 

 

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

How might a clouded mind go about examining the roots of emotional wounds, which are ultimately rooted in karma in the well hidden causal level?

 

As I mentioned previously, it is meditation that provides the environment for contemplation, not the thinking mind. If you are really curious about how such a process might work, I could recommend some reading. There usually isn't anything hidden about most emotional wounds, except the deepest ones.

 

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Attachment to reality causes emotional pain? Reality is how it is. Being attached to reality sounds like a good place to be, being unattached to reality is a place I wouldn’t risk going to.

 

Attachment to things changing is the problem. Being attached to anything is problematic, since reality is in constant flux. 

 

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

I agree we can be averse to reality, and the best way to deal with that is to sit with the emotional pain for as long as it takes to process. This is attachment to reality as it is, and will resolve emotional pain over time.

 

That is one way to go about it. 

 

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Leaving the emotional pain arena by identifying with awareness is the ultimate aversion tactic.

 

You are welcome to your opinion, but I think there are number of misunderstandings there.

 

10 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Trauma may be silenced and remain unfelt, but if it isn’t processed it will remain as karma for another day or another life.

 

See above. 

 

Bindi, I am answering your questions in an effort to be helpful. Do you know why are you asking them?

[Bindi]

6 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

@Bindi

 

This isn´t your first transcendence / integration rodeo.  I remember threads addressing this question years ago, and the topic seems to be of great and lasting interest to you.  If you care to share, I think it might turn the conversation in a useful direction to know a little bit more about the history of your interest in this area and why it seems important to you.  (Of course I understand if you´d rather not share.)

I have spent the better part of fifty years going towards emotions, deliberately engaging with them, honouring them. Reading that this going towards emotions is now considered best practice is news to me, but I’m not surprised that psychology has arrived at this point because it is a fundamental truism. Over time I have come to understand how valuable this is, how necessary this work is for our overall energy body system. The idea of transcending emotions so they become “external to what we really are” (Stirling) denies the value of emotional work as the path and the value of emotions when the end goal is reached. Emotions are always intrinsic, as path, because this is our biggest problem, and as part of the final whole energy system. This is not to deny that some mental work has to be done here and there, and some body work, but the greatest task is emotional healing. 

John Welwood was right when he recognised the danger of spiritual bypassing in Buddhism. Not engaging with emotions walks away from the mess within, sweeps it under the carpet. Since the term spiritual bypassing was coined, some collective awareness has emerged that we shouldn’t be avoiding emotions, but that hasn’t swung around yet to emotional work being the most important work. Now it seems most likely that people will say ‘a bit of this and a bit of that’, a bit of emotions and a bit of transcendence. But they are mutually exclusive, transcendence denies the value of engaging with emotions, and emotional integration denies the possibility of transcendence which keeps emotions at arms length. 

Im starting to see how the whole energy system works, and it’s somewhat intricate but absolutely perfect and beautiful, an amazing work of art, and our emotional nature has a place in this ultimate system. I’m fighting for a new paradigm, which at the same time is as old as the hills, because it was recognised long ago in certain aspects of daoism and neidan and the Yogas. But these underlying truisms have been largely suffocated by quick and easy nonduality which walks roughshod over the Ancients clear understanding of what needs to be addressed for true spiritual growth. 

[liminal_luke]

Thanks @Bindi for that explanation.  I agree that learning to be with emotions, rather than somehow bypassing or running away from them, is of utmost importance.  It´s a key part of my path as well.  I often do my own version of "morning pages," the practice of stream-of-consciousness freewriting popularized by Julia Cameron in her book The Artist´s Way.  The process is invariably emotional for me and I often find myself crying into my morning latte at cafes, to the chagrin and possible discomfort of other customers, alas.  Be that as it may, I find the process helpful and always feel better and more centered afterwards.  I´ve learned much about myself this way.

 

Where I disagree is the idea that emotional processing is incompatible with nondual traditions.  This hasn´t been my experience.  Many years ago I attended a long vipassana retreat and lots of emotion came up during my sitting time.  Normally I would of distracted myself from the uncomfortable feelings with donuts or Netflix or (shudders!) online forum writing -- but of course none of my usual outlets were available at the retreat center.  Instead I was instructed simply to be with the emotions as they appeared.  My meditation teachers were not psychotherapists and the process didn´t have an explicitly psychological aim but in practice I found it very healing on an emotional level.  

 

I do agree that some people use nondual meditation techniques to spiritually "bypass" emotions.  In my view, this is a misuse of such techniques and a good teacher would notice when that´s happening and encourage students to be with what comes up -- even sometimes uncomfortable emotion.  

Edited Friday at 09:58 PM by liminal_luke

[Mark Foote]

57 minutes ago, Bindi said:

... I'm starting to see how the whole energy system works, and it’s somewhat intricate but absolutely perfect and beautiful, an amazing work of art, and our emotional nature has a place in this ultimate system. I’m fighting for a new paradigm, which at the same time is as old as the hills, because it was recognised long ago in certain aspects of daoism and neidan and the Yogas. But these underlying truisms have been largely suffocated by quick and easy nonduality which walks roughshod over the Ancients clear understanding of what needs to be addressed for true spiritual growth. 
 

 

 

Writing a very long piece for my own site, lately. The gist of it would be that when Gautama spoke of concentration, "one-pointedness of mind" was assumed, and when he spoke of the four arisings of mindfulness, "the five limbs" were assumed.  "The five limbs" would be the four concentrations concerned with the body,  the cessation of habit and volition in the activity of the body being the fourth, and an overview of the body taken after the fourth.

The four arisings are the arising of mindfulness of the body in the body, of the feelings in the feelings, of the mind in the mind, and of the states of mind in the states of mind.  Gautama declared that his way of living was one particular instance of the four arisings, an instance composed of sixteen observations or contemplations, four in each of the arisings. Among the sixteen was:

Contemplating cessation I shall breathe in. Contemplating cessation I shall breathe out.
 

(SN 54.1; tr. PTS vol. V p 275-276; MN 118 “beholding stopping”)

 

The contemplation of “cessation” while breathing in and while breathing out is conducive to the cessation of habit and volition in inhalation and exhalation, the hallmark of the fourth concentration, particularly if there has been a recent experience of “the five limbs”.

Gautama declared the mindfulness of the sixteen was the “best of ways”, and his usual way of living in the rainy season (SN 54.11; PTS vol. V p 289). 

More from the piece I'm writing, which I hope addresses the issue of transcendence versus integration, if somewhat obliquely:
 

There are many different schools of Buddhism. Nevertheless, I would guess that most respected Buddhist teachers experience “the five limbs” of concentration regularly (even though they may not describe their experience as such), and most practice a mindfulness very much like the mindfulness that was Gautama’s way of living.

They do so in part because, as Gautama said, that mindfulness:
 

… if cultivated and made much of, is something peaceful and choice, something perfect in itself, and a pleasant way of living too.

 

(SN 54.9, tr. PTS SN vol. V p 285)

 

By Gautama’s own admission, enlightenment is not required to enjoy that “pleasant way of living”:
 

Formerly… before I myself was enlightened with the perfect wisdom, and was yet a Bodhisattva, I used generally to spend my time in this way of living.

(SN 54.8; PTS vol. V p 280: “the Tathagatha’s way of life”, 289)

In the sermon on “the seven (types of) persons existing in the world”, Gautama also admitted that there are those who have “seen by means of wisdom” and yet have not completely destroyed the cankers (the cankers are “craving for the life of sense”, “craving for becoming”, and “craving for not-becoming” [DN 22; PTS vol. ii p 340]--when the cankers are “destroyed”, the roots of the craving for sense-pleasures, the roots of the craving “to continue, to survive, to be” [tr. “bhava”, Bhikkyu Sujato], and the roots of the craving not “to be” [the craving for the ignorance of being] are destroyed).
 

If a person can enjoy a mindfulness like Gautama’s without having become enlightened, and can have “seen by means of wisdom” without having completely destroyed the cankers, then how can one know who to trust as a teacher?
 

... Gautama came to his awakening, and to the mindfulness that he taught, through concentration:

 

I know that while my father, the Sakyan, was ploughing, and I was sitting in the cool shade of a rose-apple tree, aloof from pleasures of the senses, aloof from unskilled states of mind, I entered on the first meditation (concentration), which is accompanied by initial thought and discursive thought, is born of aloofness, and is rapturous and joyful, and while abiding therein, I thought: ‘Now could this be a way to awakening?’ Then, following on my mindfulness… there was the consciousness: This is itself the Way to awakening. This occurred to me…: ‘Now, am I afraid of that happiness which is happiness apart from sense-pleasures, apart from unskilled states of mind?’ This occurred to me…: I am not afraid of that happiness which is happiness apart from sense-pleasures, apart from unskilled states of mind.’

(MN 36; PTS vol I p 301; parenthetical added)
 

 

When Gautama spoke of concentration, one-pointedness of mind was implied. When he spoke of the four arisings of mindfulness, as shortly before his death, I believe the practice of “the five limbs” was implied. The teachers who have benefited me the most have been those who acknowledged both these practicalities, in one way or another.     

 

In the sermon on "The Applications of Mindfulness" (Satipatthana, MN 10), Gautama lists some possible aspects of mindfulness of the feelings in the feelings:                         

 

And how does a mendicant meditate observing an aspect of feelings? 

It’s when a mendicant who feels a pleasant feeling knows: ‘I feel a pleasant feeling.’ 

When they feel a painful feeling, they know: ‘I feel a painful feeling.’

When they feel a neutral feeling, they know: ‘I feel a neutral feeling.’

When they feel a pleasant feeling of the flesh, they know: ‘I feel a pleasant feeling of the flesh.’ 

When they feel a pleasant feeling not of the flesh, they know: ‘I feel a pleasant feeling not of the flesh.’ 

When they feel a painful feeling of the flesh, they know: ‘I feel a painful feeling of the flesh.’

When they feel a painful feeling not of the flesh, they know: ‘I feel a painful feeling not of the flesh.’ 

When they feel a neutral feeling of the flesh, they know: ‘I feel a neutral feeling of the flesh.’

When they feel a neutral feeling not of the flesh, they know: ‘I feel a neutral feeling not of the flesh.’ 

And so they meditate observing an aspect of feelings internally, externally, and both internally and externally. They meditate observing feelings as liable to originate, as liable to vanish, and as liable to both originate and vanish. Or mindfulness is established that feelings exist, to the extent necessary for knowledge and mindfulness. They meditate independent, not grasping at anything in the world.

That’s how a mendicant meditates by observing an aspect of feelings.

 

I have summarized the actionable elements of the mindfulness that Gautama said was his own way of living, as follows. The second element has to do with mindfulness of feeling in the feelings. It's a far cry from the description above, but the version I believe associated with "one-pointedness of mind", and perhaps part of the thought "initial and sustained" of the first concentration:
 

1) Relax the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation;

2) Find a feeling of ease and calm the senses connected with balance, in inhalation and exhalation;

3) Appreciate and detach from thought, in inhalation and exhalation;

4) Look to the free location of consciousness for the automatic activity of inhalation and exhalation.

(Applying the Pali Instructions)

 

That's integration, and in the fourth element a kind of transcendence. As you said, the transcendence is necessary to the integration, the integration is necessary to the transcendence.

 

 

Edited Friday at 10:34 PM by Mark Foote

[Bindi]

18 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Thanks @Bindi for that explanation.  I agree that learning to be with emotions, rather than somehow bypassing or running away from them, is of utmost importance.  It´s a key part of my path as well.  I often do my own version of "morning pages," the practice of stream-of-consciousness freewriting popularized by Julia Cameron in her book The Artist´s Way.  The process is invariably emotional for me and I often find myself crying into my morning latte at cafes, to the chagrin and possible discomfort of other customers, unfortunately.  Be that as it may, I find the process helpful and always feel better and more centered afterwards.  I´ve learned much about myself this way.

 

Where I disagree is the idea that emotional processing is incompatible with nondual traditions.  This hasn´t been my experience.  Many years ago I attended a long vipassana retreat and lots of emotion came up during my sitting time.  Normally I would of distracted myself from the uncomfortable feelings with donuts or Netflix or (shudders!) online forum writing -- but of course none of my usual outlets were available at the retreat center.  Instead I was instructed simply to be with the emotions as they appeared.  My meditation teachers were not psychotherapists and the process didn´t have an explicitly psychological aim but in practice I found it very healing on an emotional level.  
 

Vipassana seems to be a passive approach to emotions, emphasising passive observation of emotions, detachment to these emotions, and impermanence of emotions, with the aim of diminishing the power of emotions and karmic patterns. Vipassana does not ask people to actively engage with emotions, nor intentionally recreate emotions. 
 

Do you personally engage with emotions that come up, actively feeling the feeling, or do you observe them from a detached perspective, mentally framing them as impermanent? 
 

I assume a Vipassana teacher would be quite opposed to my assertion that emotions need to be fully engaged with, and even that they need to be recreated and actively felt if they come up in dreams. Even though both methods work with emotions, I think the seemingly small difference in method leads to vastly different outcomes. 

 

18 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

I do agree that some people use nondual meditation techniques to spiritually "bypass" emotions.  In my view, this is a misuse of such techniques and a good teacher would notice when that´s happening and encourage students to be with what comes up -- even sometimes uncomfortable emotion.  

Modern Nonduality claims nondual realisation can be achieved in extremely short timeframes, after a single exposure to nondual theory even. Stirling suggests that emotions and karma can be disengaged from in weeks or a month. Older styles of nonduality acknowledge their process takes years at least, but I still find their outcome to fall short of our potential. 
 

Neidan asks that we return to our original spirit, yoga asks that we keep going within until we come to our Atman. The person who achieves this aim authentically is the one who has found the ultimate solution, and this is not discussed in nondual circles. 

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

Do you personally engage with emotions that come up, actively feeling the feeling, or do you observe them from a detached perspective, mentally framing them as impermanent? 
 

 

In my journaling work I do actively engage with emotion, noting what emotions are arising, where I feel them in my body, what my mind tells me they´re about.  Have you heard of the psychiatrist Phil Stutz and his "tools"?  A movie about him recently came out on Netflix.  Anyway, he emphasizes shadow work and developing a relationship with one´s shadow as a key to psychological growth.  I´m thinking of buying his shadow-work webinar.  So yes, I´m very into approaches that involve actively going towards emotion.  I agree that vipassana is more passive in this regard, neither going towards nor shrinking from emotion.  But believe me -- plenty of emotions can come up during an extended retreat!  

 

To me, approaches that aim to process emotions, such as various forms of psychotherapy, and nondual spiritual practices are different things.  There´s some overlap but the focus and aims are different.  I think they´re both good!  Come dinnertime, some people prefer a big hunk of steak, others a loaded baked potato.  Me, I go for the combo -- ruthlessly combining those meaty nondual juices with the carby goodness of a feeling-foward tuber.  Or something like that...

Edited Friday at 11:16 PM by liminal_luke

[Mark Foote]

26 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Vipassana seems to be a passive approach to emotions, emphasising passive observation of emotions, detachment to these emotions, and impermanence of emotions, with the aim of diminishing the power of emotions and karmic patterns. Vipassana does not ask people to actively engage with emotions, nor intentionally recreate emotions. 
 

Do you personally engage with emotions that come up, actively feeling the feeling, or do you observe them from a detached perspective, mentally framing them as impermanent? 
 

I assume a Vipassana teacher would be quite opposed to my assertion that emotions need to be fully engaged with, and even that they need to be recreated and actively felt if they come up in dreams. Even though both methods work with emotions, I think the seemingly small difference in method leads to vastly different outcomes. 

 

Modern Nonduality claims nondual realisation can be achieved in extremely short timeframes, after a single exposure to nondual theory even. Stirling suggests that emotions and karma can be disengaged from in weeks or a month. Older styles of nonduality acknowledge their process takes years at least, but I still find their outcome to fall short of our potential. 
 

Neidan asks that we return to our original spirit, yoga asks that we keep going within until we come to our Atman. The person who achieves this aim authentically is the one who has found the ultimate solution, and this is not discussed in nondual circles. 
 

 

 

I won't disagree, though I'm not that familiar with Neidan or yoga.

After I wrote my response up above, I realized that I was probably not headed in the direction you were hoping for.  I recalled Dr. John Upledger's writing on "SomatoEmotional Release". 

 

The allopathic medical profession has failed to find any evidence of a rhythm in the cranial-sacral fluid, the basis of Dr. Upledger's approach, and the osteopathic professionals may be aware of his approach but they don't seem to acknowledge such a rhythm either (how could they, when their licensing requirements are just like the MD's).

An interview where Upledger lays out his approach:

 

http://www.shareguide.com/Upledger.html

 

 

It's an old website, not https, so if you're using Chrome you may have to go through a warning.

 

Upledger came to understand that physical trauma can be stored in the structure of the body.  He had good experience using his cranial-sacral technique to allow the energy of the trauma stored in the body to re-emerge, usually along the same pathway by which it had entered.

I think you may be able to check his book on the subject out of the library, if not it's inexpensive:
 

"Your inner physician and you : craniosacral therapy and somatoemotional release", Upledger, John E., 1979

 

 

Edited Friday at 11:18 PM by Mark Foote

[idquest]

Emotions = chemicals registered in the brain + metabolism of bacteria in our gut.

 

I don't think emotions have any impact on spiritual development other than serve as a distraction.

[Bindi]

4 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

In my journaling work I do actively engage with emotion, noting what emotions are arising, where I feel them in my body, what my mind tells me they´re about.  Have you heard of the psychiatrist Phil Stutz and his "tools"?  A movie about him recently came out on Netflix.  Anyway, he emphasizes shadow work and developing a relationship with one´s shadow as a key to psychological growth.  I´m thinking of buying his shadow-work webinar.  So yes, I´m very into approaches that involve actively going towards emotion.  I agree that vipassana is more passive in this regard, neither going towards nor shrinking from emotion.  But believe me -- plenty of emotions can come up during an extended retreat!  

 

To me, approaches that aim to process emotions, such as various forms of psychotherapy, and nondual spiritual practices are different things.  There´s some overlap but the focus and aims are different.  I think they´re both good!  Come dinnertime, some people prefer a big hunk of steak, others a loaded baked potato.  Me, I go for the combo -- ruthlessly combining those meaty nondual juices with the carby goodness of a feeling-foward tuber.  Or something like that...

Both are good if both get you to the causal body, where the wizard of oz is pulling the levers. However, I’m quite sure that nondual spiritual practices do not get you to the wizard of oz, as they don’t go beyond the subtle body. Anyway, it’s good to hear that you are engaging with your emotions and shadow work.

[Apech]

Gosh what a fantastic thread - it has given me a lot to think about.

 

Thanks to everyone esp. Bindi for their contributions so far.

 

 

[Cobie]

 

 

Edited yesterday at 12:31 AM by Cobie

[Bindi]

40 minutes ago, Cobie said:

integration = transcendence.
知其白, 守其黑   zhi1 qi2 bai2, shou3 qi2 hei1 - To know your white, keep to your black. (DDJ Ch 28)

What do the white and black signify for you? 
 

To me black refers to the emotional, chaotic, receptive, and feminine force, associated with the shadow, unconscious aspects, and the deeply felt emotional currents that flow through us but may be harder to control or understand, whereas white refers to the linear, mental, logical, and masculine force, corresponding to the conscious mind, the intellect, and the structured, unified aspects of existence.

 

In my understanding, the relationship between the black and the white reflects the need for these forces to work together harmoniously, where yang (the rational, linear mental force) is able to bring clarity, structure, and order to the chaotic and emotional yin (the chaotic, emotional, feminine force) once the black or yin emotional side has been thoroughly integrated and processed. I don’t see this as transcending or eliminating one side, but rather integrating them to harmonise these two aspects of our being. 

[dwai]

Advaita Vedanta clearly states that you get what was always yours and you lose that which was never yours to begin with.
 

Instead of looking at nondual systems as transcendence models, I would suggest to look at them as models to dispel delusions (about identity, etc). How does one dispel a delusion? By first becoming aware that it is a delusion, and further by recognizing what is causing the delusion. The source of delusion is the ego which assumes ownership of labels meant for categorization. this works for all forms of identification (gender, nationality, job, skill, and so on). This even extends to emotions. The identification can happen for both positive or negative attributes. The positive part is obvious to most - if someone is good at something, and they get social approval etc, their ego will fixate on it. But it can happen for negative (someone their intellect would rationalize as undesirable) things too. 
 

There’s an upanishadic parable I'm reminded of. There was a washerman who lived in a typical Indian village a long time ago. He has a donkey that he used to carry his load of clothes every morning to the riverbank where he washed dirty clothes, dried, folded and delivered them back to his customers in the village. One day, he had a big argument with his wife, and absent-mindedly he loaded that day’s clothes on the donkey’s back and walked to the riverbank. 
 

As he unloaded the clothes off the donkey’s back, he sought to tie the donkey to a branch of the tree where he usually left it, before proceeding  to do his washing. But he realized that he had forgotten to get the rope he used to tie the donkey. And so he was in a fix, because the thought that if he left the donkey untied under the tree to wash clothes, it would wander off. The washerman was poor, and he couldn’t afford to lose the donkey. But he couldn’t go back home either, because his day’s livelihood depended on him washing and returning the clothes to his customers. If he didn’t work, his family wouldn’t eat. 
 

As he stood there looking stressed, the village wise man, who was walking by, asked him what was wrong. He explained the predicament. 
 

The wise man said, “listen — this is a donkey, it’s not known for its intellectual prowess. Just pretend like you’re tying it up, and leave for your work. It will be there when you come back.”

Given that it was the wisest man in the village who gave him the advice the washerman followed the instructions. And sure enough, when he came back with his washed and folded load of clothes from the river bank in the evening, the donkey was standing right where he left him, happily munching on the leaves he left for him.  He loaded up the donkey, and tried to walk back, but the donkey wouldn’t budge. No matter what he did, it wouldn’t move. He pleaded, cajoled, raged and beat the poor beast, but it was as though the donkey was transfixed in the very spot where he had left him all day. 
 

luckily for him, the wise man whose advice he had followed in the morning happened to be returning to the village around then. Seeing the washerman distraught again, he asked “what is the problem now?”

 

The washerman explained what the problem was. The wise

man laughed and said, “it’s very simple. Remember how you had pretended to tie your donkey up in the morning? Now pretend to untie it.”

Although skeptical of the solution, the washerman followed the instructions. And lo and behold the donkey happily started walking away from the tree. The washerman profusely thanked the wise man as they walked back together to the village. He asked for an explanation as they were walking back. The wise man explained, “donkeys are creatures of habit. Whatever you train them to do, they will do. All its life you’ve trained it to respond to the tying and untying of the rope. It learned early on that it couldn’t wander off to graze elsewhere, so it didn’t wander off when you pretend tied it up this morning. It also learned that it couldn’t move without being untied first, as it would hurt if it tried to walk away while still tied to the tree. So it waited for you to untie it.”

 

Now let us consider a hypothetical person who has suffered a lot of emotional trauma. It is likely that their ego has to attached to this as an identity. Why? Habit/familiarity.
 

The mind is comprised of four functions. The field of thoughts we normally associate with the “mind” - - called manas in Sanskrit. The intellect (aka buddhi), which helps in analyzing and understanding. The storehouse of memories and feelings (aka chitta) from which both memories and feelings are extracted when we experience any phenomenon (this happens in a flash, and the intellect then uses these to evaluate and label/categorize it - such as good or bad, etc). Finally is the ego (ahamkara) that affixes ownership of the label/category (such as my memory, my feeling as so on). The ego is like the donkey, it fixates on these labels and categories and stays attached to them.
 

Just like with the washerman, as long as the donkey was expected to do the right it without the right conditions, it didn’t follow the commands given by the washerman. But once the washerman (informed by the wise man in the parable) figured out the right conditions to make it behave properly, the donkey followed the commands happily. 
 

Nondual traditions don’t transcend manas, chitta or ahamkara, but using the intellect (buddhi), overcomes the tendencies they are susceptible to, to become free of delusions. Emotions don’t need to be transcended or transmuted, but rather they need to be recognized along with their triggers, and that will allow us to release ourselves from their bondage.  

[doc benway]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

Do you personally engage with emotions that come up, actively feeling the feeling,

 

Yes, this is an important part of the dzogchen path which is a non-dual practice. My experience has been that being able to release some of the over-identification with the subject of emotional experience allows me to experience more clearly, more directly, with less dysfunctional and habitual overlay. It’s a bit paradoxical that realizing a less “subjective” mode of experience can actually facilitate a more full experience and create an openness that permits a wider range, and less patterned and predictable responses.

 

Quote

or do you observe them from a detached perspective, mentally framing them as impermanent? 

 

Never, intentionally, as this is not the practice, although I can’t say it never happens. The inner narrator likes to work overtime.

 

1 hour ago, idquest said:

Emotions = chemicals registered in the brain + metabolism of bacteria in our gut.

 

I don't think emotions have any impact on spiritual development other than serve as a distraction.

 

In my practice emotions are perhaps the most valuable, not to mention plentiful, material to work with. Endless opportunities to engage in real time application of practice. 
 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

Both are good if both get you to the causal body, where the wizard of oz is pulling the levers. However, I’m quite sure that nondual spiritual practices do not get you to the wizard of oz, as they don’t go beyond the subtle body. Anyway, it’s good to hear that you are engaging with your emotions and shadow work.

 

I have a different experience and understanding. For me, and by “design,” Dzogchen (non-dual spiritual) practice encompasses, integrates, and transcends the subtle body.

Edited yesterday at 12:38 AM by doc benway

[Cobie]

 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

What do the white and black signify for you? 

Exactly the same.

 

Quote

… I don’t see this as transcending or eliminating one side, but rather integrating them to harmonise these two aspects of our being. 

 

“integrating them to harmonise these two aspects of our being” =  “transcending”.

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Cobie

[liminal_luke]

In a sense, emotional processing work and nondual traditions are aligned.  Emotional processing is targeted disidentifiction.  We become aware of our emotions in order to skillfully avoid being emotionally consumed.  Many people come to therapy, for instance, because they have trouble regulating their emotions.  Perhaps they´re consumed by rage or envy or sorrow.  It´s precisely awareness of these feelings, facilitated by emotional processing, that allows for a bit of psychic distance -- and distance that in turn relieves suffering.  When I´m aware of anger, for instance, I can notice that I´m working with two parts: the anger itself, and the part of me that is aware of the anger.  Awareness is not angry, it´s just aware -- a crucial insight.  Realizing that there is a part of me that is separate from my anger allows for some degree of freedom, some degree of choice.  I´m not compelled into a fistfight willy-nilly but can back up and think.  This kind of targeted disidentification isn´t a full-blown awakening but it is a kind of enlightenment-lite.  

Edited yesterday at 12:49 AM by liminal_luke

[Bindi]

34 minutes ago, dwai said:

Advaita Vedanta clearly states that you get what was always yours and you lose that which was never yours to begin with.
 

Instead of looking at nondual systems as transcendence models, I would suggest to look at them as models to dispel delusions (about identity, etc). How does one dispel a delusion? By first becoming aware that it is a delusion, and further by recognizing what is causing the delusion. The source of delusion is the ego which assumes ownership of labels meant for categorization. this works for all forms of identification (gender, nationality, job, skill, and so on). This even extends to emotions. The identification can happen for both positive or negative attributes. The positive part is obvious to most - if someone is good at something, and they get social approval etc, their ego will fixate on it. But it can happen for negative (someone their intellect would rationalize as undesirable) things too. 
 

There’s an upanishadic parable I'm reminded of. There was a washerman who lived in a typical Indian village a long time ago. He has a donkey that he used to carry his load of clothes every morning to the riverbank where he washed dirty clothes, dried, folded and delivered them back to his customers in the village. One day, he had a big argument with his wife, and absent-mindedly he loaded that day’s clothes on the donkey’s back and walked to the riverbank. 
 

As he unloaded the clothes off the donkey’s back, he sought to tie the donkey to a branch of the tree where he usually left it, before proceeding  to do his washing. But he realized that he had forgotten to get the rope he used to tie the donkey. And so he was in a fix, because the thought that if he left the donkey untied under the tree to wash clothes, it would wander off. The washerman was poor, and he couldn’t afford to lose the donkey. But he couldn’t go back home either, because his day’s livelihood depended on him washing and returning the clothes to his customers. If he didn’t work, his family wouldn’t eat. 
 

As he stood there looking stressed, the village wise man, who was walking by, asked him what was wrong. He explained the predicament. 
 

The wise man said, “listen — this is a donkey, it’s not known for its intellectual prowess. Just pretend like you’re tying it up, and leave for your work. It will be there when you come back.”

Given that it was the wisest man in the village who gave him the advice the washerman followed the instructions. And sure enough, when he came back with his washed and folded load of clothes from the river bank in the evening, the donkey was standing right where he left him, happily munching on the leaves he left for him.  He loaded up the donkey, and tried to walk back, but the donkey wouldn’t budge. No matter what he did, it wouldn’t move. He pleaded, cajoled, raged and beat the poor beast, but it was as though the donkey was transfixed in the very spot where he had left him all day. 
 

luckily for him, the wise man whose advice he had followed in the morning happened to be returning to the village around then. Seeing the washerman distraught again, he asked “what is the problem now?”

 

The washerman explained what the problem was. The wise

man laughed and said, “it’s very simple. Remember how you had pretended to tie your donkey up in the morning? Now pretend to untie it.”

Although skeptical of the solution, the washerman followed the instructions. And lo and behold the donkey happily started walking away from the tree. The washerman profusely thanked the wise man as they walked back together to the village. He asked for an explanation as they were walking back. The wise man explained, “donkeys are creatures of habit. Whatever you train them to do, they will do. All its life you’ve trained it to respond to the tying and untying of the rope. It learned early on that it couldn’t wander off to graze elsewhere, so it didn’t wander off when you pretend tied it up this morning. It also learned that it couldn’t move without being untied first, as it would hurt if it tried to walk away while still tied to the tree. So it waited for you to untie it.”

 

Now let us consider a hypothetical person who has suffered a lot of emotional trauma. It is likely that their ego has to attached to this as an identity. Why? Habit/familiarity.
 

The mind is comprised of four functions. The field of thoughts we normally associate with the “mind” - - called manas in Sanskrit. The intellect (aka buddhi), which helps in analyzing and understanding. The storehouse of memories and feelings (aka chitta) from which both memories and feelings are extracted when we experience any phenomenon (this happens in a flash, and the intellect then uses these to evaluate and label/categorize it - such as good or bad, etc). Finally is the ego (ahamkara) that affixes ownership of the label/category (such as my memory, my feeling as so on). The ego is like the donkey, it fixates on these labels and categories and stays attached to them.
 

Just like with the washerman, as long as the donkey was expected to do the right it without the right conditions, it didn’t follow the commands given by the washerman. But once the washerman (informed by the wise man in the parable) figured out the right conditions to make it behave properly, the donkey followed the commands happily. 
 

Nondual traditions don’t transcend manas, chitta or ahamkara, but using the intellect (buddhi), overcomes the tendencies they are susceptible to, to become free of delusions. Emotions don’t need to be transcended or transmuted, but rather they need to be recognized along with their triggers, and that will allow us to release ourselves from their bondage.  

The ego’s conditioned tendencies are initially fed by karma - the ego which operates on these deeply rooted conditioned tendencies can be dismantled but this doesn’t dismantle the karmic imperative from deeper layers that continues to operate. Dismantling the ego (through self-inquiry or intellectual recognition) addresses only the surface level of these tendencies. The deeper karmic imperative, rooted in the causal level and the unconscious continues to exert influence. Without addressing karma at its source, the fundamental forces driving these tendencies remain intact, perpetuating reincarnation with its karmic drivers. 

 

[dwai]

7 minutes ago, Bindi said:

The ego’s conditioned tendencies are initially fed by karma - the ego which operates on these deeply rooted conditioned tendencies can be dismantled but this doesn’t dismantle the karmic imperative from deeper layers that continues to operate. Dismantling the ego (through self-inquiry or intellectual recognition) addresses only the surface level of these tendencies. The deeper karmic imperative, rooted in the causal level and the unconscious continues to exert influence. Without addressing karma at its source, the fundamental forces driving these tendencies remain intact, perpetuating reincarnation with its karmic drivers. 

 

Interesting. What is the root cause of “karma” according to you? 

[Bindi]

36 minutes ago, dwai said:

Interesting. What is the root cause of “karma” according to you? 

I see the root cause of karma as unprocessed emotions and false thoughts or beliefs, which interact and reinforce one another. This creates a dysfunctional program in the causal body that shapes our lived reality to align with its underlying patterns. These external circumstances recreate opportunities for us to process unresolved emotions and gain mental clarity, allowing for the resolution of what was left incomplete in previous lives.
 

[dwai]

12 minutes ago, Bindi said:

I see the root cause of karma as unprocessed emotions and false thoughts or beliefs, which interact and reinforce one another. This creates a dysfunctional program in the causal body that shapes our lived reality to align with its underlying patterns. These external circumstances recreate opportunities for us to process unresolved emotions and gain mental clarity, allowing for the resolution of what was left incomplete in previous lives.
 

Fascinating! I think you’re mistaking the symptom for the cause. If you focus on treating the symptom you can’t cure the disease. The root of karma is delusion/ignorance. 

[Bindi]

55 minutes ago, dwai said:

Fascinating! I think you’re mistaking the symptom for the cause. If you focus on treating the symptom you can’t cure the disease. The root of karma is delusion/ignorance. 

Can you specify what you mean by delusion/ignorance in the context of karma?

 

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Bindi

[old3bob]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

Fascinating! I think you’re mistaking the symptom for the cause. If you focus on treating the symptom you can’t cure the disease. The root of karma is delusion/ignorance. 

 

karma being a law and lawful I'd say that there is no delusion or ignorance in what it pertains to... such denial sounds way off...

Edited 20 hours ago by old3bob

[doc benway]

8 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 

karma being a law and lawful I'd say that there is no delusion or ignorance in what it pertains to... such denial sounds way off...

 

Karma is created by ignorance.

In the absence of ignorance, karma cannot accumulate. Karma is a law in the sense of physics having laws, more a description of series of observations over time.