The End of Suffering

[another bob]

"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed, in the cognized, there is only the cognized. Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here; this is how you should train yourself. Since, there is for you in the seen, only the seen, in the heard, only the heard, in the sensed, only the sensed, in the cognized, only the cognized, and you see that there is no thing here, you will therefore see that indeed there is no thing there. As you see that there is no thing there, you will see that you are therefore located neither in the world of this, nor in the world of that, nor in any place betwixt the two. This alone is the end of suffering.”

~Bahiya Sutta


:yo:

[Orph]

That gave me a head-ache. Need to take a pill to end my suffering. "In the seen, there is only the seen, Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here" How can you see no thing? I "seen" something, even if the "seen is only the seen". If there is "no thing" to be seen", then how can there be a "in the seen"? "If you see there is no thing here, and no thing there, you will see that you are neither in the world of this or that". If there is no "here or there, this or that" then there can't be a neither to not be located in. Man-oh-man. I sure am in the dark when it comes to this enlightenment stuff.

[another bob]

That gave me a head-ache. Need to take a pill to end my suffering. "In the seen, there is only the seen, Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here" How can you see no thing? I "seen" something, even if the "seen is only the seen". If there is "no thing" to be seen", then how can there be a "in the seen"? "If you see there is no thing here, and no thing there, you will see that you are neither in the world of this or that". If there is no "here or there, this or that" then there can't be a neither to not be located in. Man-oh-man. I sure am in the dark when it comes to this enlightenment stuff.


The first step is to dis-embed from impermanent phenomena until the only thing that appears real is this all pervading uncreated awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding on to it after this realization can however become a subtle form of grasping disguised as letting go.

The second step is therefore to realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is the very nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self and the appearances arising and passing within the Self dissolve, revealing the suchness of what is.

The next step is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, nor solid material objects, but only six streams of dependently arising sensory experience -- the seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle absorption states).

Practically speaking, one can either split each of the 5 aggregates into 6 streams of consciousness, to see how the sense of "a body" (aggregate of form) arises when all senses working together create the illusion of substantiality, much like the images and the sounds tracks of a movie together create the illusion of reality. Using the same method we can also see how the illusion of a solid body dissolves when we look deeply and see that what we had assumed to be a body is nothing more than an illusion created by 6 impermanent, separate-yet-interdependent streams of consciousness.

We can also investigate the sense of self as such.

In the seen, only the seen. We first realize that we cannot know the objects seen as such, but only the seen (shapes, colors, textures, etc.). We also realize that there is no separate entity that sees. There is seeing, but no seer. Seeing is seeing. Same with the other streams of sense consciousness.

Then, look for a sense of self, and see whether it is more associated with one of these 6 streams of consciousness. It is generally associated with a physical sensation around the solar plexus or gut, and is therefore related to the stream of sensing-consciousness. When this is seen for what it is, the sense of self drops. There is nothing beside the spontaneous functioning of the senses.

Here the purpose is not to lock and make permanent a special state of consciousness, but only to gain deeper and deeper insights into Reality until we become absolutely unable to make anything into "me" or "mine".

:yo:

[TraineeHuman]

Words words words.

For practical purposes, our body does need to have, for instance, an address – “my” address, where I keep “my” clothes and “my” food and so on. That’s one part of the truth, at a practical level.

Then again, there’s also some more profound truth. The truth also is, each of us is not really our body, nor our mind, nor our feelings, nor our thoughts, nor our Forum posts – although nearly everybody has tricked themselves into falsely believing that they are one or all of these. They’ve tricked themselves because, alas, they don’t know better. How sad to limit oneself that way. Now that’s selling your soul.

What they (most of them) apparently don’t know – or don’t know strongly enough – is that “what” they really are is something that’s:
- everywhere in the multiverse
- far more real than anything else
- far more beautiful than anything else
- unlimited in every way
- far more fully present than anything else
- far better than the mind and heart can even imagine.

That's the pearl of great price, that's worth a lot more than the whole field it's in.

The question is, isn't it worth more than anything for you to find that pearl, folks? And as Bob mentions, part of the cosmic joke is that once you've found it, or at least touched it, you have to not-cling. Then again, if you think there's some point to clinging to it, you probably haven't found it yet, or else somehow you've partly forgotten that you found it and then partially lost sight of it again, maybe?

And even once a person finds it, it's still covered in mud and grime. While you still have a body you'll be busy removing that grime, because the grime doesn't come off easily -- even though you can certainly see the beauty of the pearl shining through it.

[jorr lundstrom]

An animal body living in contact and relationship with the surroundings and
non-entity experiencing this in a state of uninterrupted bliss is
possible and have been for some months. To unplanned fall into a
bowl of milk made this impudent statment possible. Of course those who
have been on a path for 40 years imagines this as impossible. But non
the less..............

Thank you non-Bob and non-TraineeHuman for the posts.

All is well.


non-Jorr

[PurpleLama]

I do believe this is the best I've heard this described, or shall I say the clearest, at least, to me. Thanks bob, I'd actually been wondering about the solar plexus thingie.



That gave me a head-ache. Need to take a pill to end my suffering. "In the seen, there is only the seen, Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here" How can you see no thing? I "seen" something, even if the "seen is only the seen". If there is "no thing" to be seen", then how can there be a "in the seen"? "If you see there is no thing here, and no thing there, you will see that you are neither in the world of this or that". If there is no "here or there, this or that" then there can't be a neither to not be located in. Man-oh-man. I sure am in the dark when it comes to this enlightenment stuff.


The first step is to dis-embed from impermanent phenomena until the only thing that appears real is this all pervading uncreated awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding on to it after this realization can however become a subtle form of grasping disguised as letting go.

The second step is therefore to realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is the very nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self and the appearances arising and passing within the Self dissolve, revealing the suchness of what is.

The next step is to push the process of deconstruction a step further, realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness. In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, nor solid material objects, but only six streams of dependently arising sensory experience -- the seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle absorption states).

Practically speaking, one can either split each of the 5 aggregates into 6 streams of consciousness, to see how the sense of "a body" (aggregate of form) arises when all senses working together create the illusion of substantiality, much like the images and the sounds tracks of a movie together create the illusion of reality. Using the same method we can also see how the illusion of a solid body dissolves when we look deeply and see that what we had assumed to be a body is nothing more than an illusion created by 6 impermanent, separate-yet-interdependent streams of consciousness.

We can also investigate the sense of self as such.

In the seen, only the seen. We first realize that we cannot know the objects seen as such, but only the seen (shapes, colors, textures, etc.). We also realize that there is no separate entity that sees. There is seeing, but no seer. Seeing is seeing. Same with the other streams of sense consciousness.

Then, look for a sense of self, and see whether it is more associated with one of these 6 streams of consciousness. It is generally associated with a physical sensation around the solar plexus or gut, and is therefore related to the stream of sensing-consciousness. When this is seen for what it is, the sense of self drops. There is nothing beside the spontaneous functioning of the senses.

Here the purpose is not to lock and make permanent a special state of consciousness, but only to gain deeper and deeper insights into Reality until we become absolutely unable to make anything into "me" or "mine".

:yo:

[another bob]

I'd actually been wondering about the solar plexus thingie.

It's been said that awakening proceeds from the head to the heart, but when it gets to the gut, that's where the greatest resistence awaits, because there's a lot of primal survival stuff bound up there -- hardcore stuff about the self sense. The only thing we're ever trying to protect and defend is some image we hold about ourselves, and when it comes down to brass tacks, that clinging is tensed in the hara (gut).

:yo:

[Orph]

Okay. It makes a little more sense now. Thanks. :P

[<8>]

I get a clear view once in awhile, but as I am driving down this muddy dirt road. My windshield gets cloudy and I have to remind myself to use my wipers to get a clear view.
It's a hard thing to balance once life down here, I can have a good laughter together with people and when the conversation turns into a deep one.
I have to stop myself frome saying: dont worry nothing here is really real.....

Thanks once more for a wonderful read my friends..

..8..

[DeDukshyn]

Skipping through the thread to give my take on the OP and provide support for the wonderful post ...

The wake dream is no different than the sleeping dreams except the "laws" of our density somehow got into our subconsciousness. But in reality the two work on all the same principles - the waking dream just needs to follow the laws of the plane the dream is on (at least for now ;-). So in that sense the OP cannot be wrong - a dream is what you make it.

Have you ever noticed that in a dream first you start to fear, then a fear is actualized? or how about a feeling of love that gives you reason for that feeling? I have noticed this in my own dreams and realize the only difference is that "linear time" and "the laws of physics" try to "order" all the manifestations in this world, to reflect those laws. And Alas those laws are also merely an illusion as our point of consciousness is actually outside of those influences. Only our senses and beliefs follow those laws in the wake dream ... but when they do, the illusion of "reality" as we know it happens. We need to stop relying on sense and beliefs and replace that with the guidance of the heart the subtle vibrations and influences of love, and the laws of this plane can be overcome by replacing the "3D" or "physical plane" reality on our subconscious with the more real, more powerful higher frequency self that originates from the ripple of the First Cause.

[NeverMind]

"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed, in the cognized, there is only the cognized.

But is there?
For example, I am a passionate lover of beauty, of nature, of music.
They make tears come to my eyes, when often nothing else does.
Why?
Do I love them purely because of their aesthetic value?
No. I love them because I read them as conveyors of transcendence.
I feel there is something there that transcends mere appearance (or the mere sonic value), and that's what fills my heart with bliss and gratitude.

I am sure there is a nuance or two - or five - missing in this, my interpretation of his words.
Still, I believe it is a valid remark to be made in the context of this particular discussion.
Or maybe not.

Anyway, I have spoken. :)

[DeDukshyn]

"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed, in the cognized, there is only the cognized.

But is there?
For example, I am a passionate lover of beauty, of nature, of music.
They make tears come to my eyes, when often nothing else does.
Why?
Do I love them purely because of their aesthetic value?
No. I love them because I read them as conveyors of transcendence.
I feel there is something there that transcends mere appearance (or the mere sonic value), and that's what fills my heart with bliss and gratitude.

I am sure there is a nuance or two - or five - missing in this, my interpretation of his words.
Still, I believe it is a valid remark to be made in the context of this particular discussion.
Or maybe not.

Anyway, I have spoken. :)

Excellent question (and well answered by yourself .. if I may add).. From my POV, Not everyone sees the beauty -- I know many who would look at a vast area of natural beauty and see industrial money making land for cheap. To each their own. Not all can see what is coming through.

EDIT: Let me explain this more ...

think of being able to have a high resolution monitor, or a low res one. The monitor is your perception, and different people have varying degrees of resolution to be able to view. Some have 640 x 480 resolution. they have a very limited view -- colours and shapes of the largest objects in the image -- that is all. But to someone with an extremely high res monitor, they can see those nuances, the supporting "pixels" that give you such clarity and detail - an ability to see what CANNOT be seen at 640 by 480, but at the same time the guy with the 640 x 480 screen cannot see your high res one -- they think you are crazy because they simply cannot perceive that which you are perceiving.

[another bob]

Skipping through the thread to give my take on the OP and provide support for the wonderful post ...

The wake dream is no different than the sleeping dreams except the "laws" of our density somehow got into our subconsciousness. But in reality the two work on all the same principles - the waking dream just needs to follow the laws of the plane the dream is on (at least for now ;-). So in that sense the OP cannot be wrong - a dream is what you make it.

Have you ever noticed that in a dream first you start to fear, then a fear is actualized? or how about a feeling of love that gives you reason for that feeling? I have noticed this in my own dreams and realize the only difference is that "linear time" and "the laws of physics" try to "order" all the manifestations in this world, to reflect those laws. And Alas those laws are also merely an illusion as our point of consciousness is actually outside of those influences. Only our senses and beliefs follow those laws in the wake dream ... but when they do, the illusion of "reality" as we know it happens. Stop relying on sense and beliefs and replace that with the guidance of the heart the subtle vibrations and influences of love, and the laws of this plane can be overcome by replacing the "3D" or "physical plane" reality on our subconscious with the more real, more powerful higher frequency self that originates from the ripple of the First Cause.

Nothing is what it seems. Not a single thought, conception, or experience, high or low, is anything but a modification of dreams, a hallucination, the conjunction of wave patterns, appearing very elusive to vision at times, and then rigidifying into seemingly solid objects. And yet there are no solid objects. This world is a phenomenon of light. Even quantum physics touches on this, positing that the essence of light is Consciousness Itself. Every sense of subjective or objective independence is just this -- this radiant play of light.
It is always an event in Consciousness, the vastness of which every thing that appears is simply a modification. If we attach, or cling, or fixate on any of these endlessly arising objects or conditions or their effects, exclusive of their Source, than we make those objects, states, or conditions "real" by the process of identification and differentiation -- we grant them substantiality apart from ourselves, time is born, and this reinforces the complex adventure in which we perceive ourselves as the knower/doer, separate from the continuum of arising events, and suffering.
When that presumption is recognized as the activity of separation itself and thereby begins to be undermined, these billion appearances become non-binding, fluid, and transparent. The whole adventure they imply – in whatever realm, heaven and earth and hell or high water -- is recognized as an expression of the dream, having no defining or ultimate significance, but only the play of mystery Itself.
We do not know what any of this is! We have a lot of ideas, but when they are investigated, they turn out to be based upon a notion of mistaken identity. The sense of self is like a perfume of roses, where no actual roses exist. We cannot actually differentiate ourselves from a single thing, anymore than wetness can separate itself from water.
There is no explanation for any of it, nor need for any explanation. This is not a matter of belief. It can be verified when one stops and simply contemplates the fact that we Are – simply aware that we Are, and that "What" is aware is unknowable, since nothing can be an object to itself.
It just is. Is.
What we know of dreams can serve to illuminate our "position" in the so-called waking state. In either, we are in exactly the same situation – we appear to create our environment in both conditions, as well as our sense of being an independent "I", but we have no idea how this is happening, except that we Are. Everything else is subject to interpretation, but the simple fact of Awareness is our irreducible inheritance.
By allowing attention to rest in Awareness itself, rather than on the objects and events that appear and disappear on the "screen" of Awareness, something quite interesting is revealed. Clearly the dream is our own consciousness -- who makes this dream but us? And yet we don't know what we Are, except that we Are.
Dreaming arises in our own consciousness and dissolves just the same, but can we even call it "our own"? When we awaken, we realize the dream has no significance, except what we might attribute to it in our conditioned and conditional knowing, which is itself a kind of humorous pretense that most take quite seriously, nevertheless. So serious, in fact, that when differing knowings clash, further confusions, conflicts, and even wars follow.
Just so, this waking world can be seen as not a place or world, but an indefinite dimension that is not fixed like any object, but fluidly manifesting as a play of infinite possibility, and our limited points of view can begin to be submitted to a conscious process in which we unfold in a truly heart-felt relationship to the wonder of this mystery, without the terrible burden of knowing or identification, of concern about the implications of the dream world. And paradoxically, we can begin to become responsible for our separative tendencies, which are the real creators of every circumstance of the dream, and the source of our suffering.
This true responsibility is relative to the force of our own activity, which creates the drama in the same way as if we were to complain about a pain in our arm, only to discover that we have been pinching ourselves in our sleep. The dream itself does not have to be accepted or rejected in terms of any of its content. It resists definition. Where do we dream? Where is a "place"? It is our own habitual activity which is separating, contracting, seeking, suffering, imagining, and calling all of this into form and giving it a kind of reality. When this is seen, felt, and welcomed without recoil, then our inherent freedom "resumes" as the ordinary and natural state of being.

:yo:

[DeDukshyn]

Excellent elaboration, thanks!

Made me think of one of my favorite quotes "You are the creator of All you survey."

[greybeard]

Thanks to another bob.
Its very much in line with what im beginning to understand.
Chris

[another bob]

I get a clear view once in awhile, but as I am driving down this muddy dirt road. My windshield gets cloudy and I have to remind myself to use my wipers to get a clear view..


Spiritual maturity begins to dawn when we are willing to question our most cherished religious beliefs, assumptions, and presumed identities. When our love of Truth is such that even our most closely held notions and concepts about the nature of ourselves and existence can be submitted to honest and probing inquiry -- the "Great Doubt", in Zen lingo -- then we become available at last to an Awakening Grace.

Until then, we typically drift along in a dreamy sense of un-inspected security, at the mercy of whatever conditioning filters are operative in the body/mind (based upon prior association and interpretation of perception). In Buddhism, for example, this is called The Wheel, and it spins us through innumerable dreamy births and deaths unceasingly until the fabric of the dream itself begins to wear thin, and then there is the possibility of Seeing.

Of course, in the dream there are worlds to be saved, people at war, all manner of catastrophes and delights, and an unlimited number of seeming advances and retreats, and the wheel keeps on spinning, and the Dreamer keeps dreaming, and sometimes we seem to float above our dream bodies into some subtler variation on the dream, and fly through dream tunnels into majestic and comforting realms of light and beauty, or into perpetual hell realms of misery and despair, but never once stopping to wonder:

"Is this TRUE?"

Never once stopping to pull aside the curtain and unveil the Wizard at last, because the nature of Oz is so seductive, and those poppy fields are so very potent, and the last thing anybody really wants is to Awaken, despite all protests to the contrary, for to Awaken entails walking off that cliff and flinging oneself into the Unknown, and that is a terrifying prospect indeed, and so we remain asleep, cuddled up in the comfortable blankets of illusion, and somewhere in the remote distance there is a Call, but in our accumulated congestion of dreaminess it is so easy to dismiss, until one day the truth can no longer be ignored, and the sunlight just floods through our little bedroom windows, stripping all the blankets off and exposing our nakedness, and then we are really in for it!



Love wants to reach out and manhandle us,
Break all our teacup talk of God.

If you had the courage and
Could give the Beloved His choice, some nights,
He would just drag you around the room
By your hair,
Ripping from your grip all those toys in the world
That bring you no joy.

Love sometimes gets tired of speaking sweetly
And wants to rip to shreds
All your erroneous notions of truth

That make you fight within yourself, dear one,
And with others,

Causing the world to weep
On too many fine days.

God wants to manhandle us,
Lock us inside of a tiny room with Himself
And practice His dropkick.

The Beloved sometimes wants
To do us a great favor:

Hold us upside down
And shake all the nonsense out.

But when we hear
He is in such a "playful drunken mood"
Most everyone I know
Quickly packs their bags and hightails it
Out of town.

~ Hafiz


:yo:

[jorr lundstrom]

There is a story from Sri Lanka about an old Buddhist master who knew
he was dying. He gathered all the monks and said: Its now, if anyone
of you want enlightenment, step forward, cos tomorrow I wount be
here. Not one moved.

You know, postponing, maybe another day, not now.

All those days that came and went, I didnt know it was my life. LOL


Jorr

[<8>]

Thanks Bob.. *wipe my tears away*

To be honest with you I don't have the words to make you feel better, well I could have used the lovely tale of the siren, instead of a dirty windshield.

There's Always A Next Time...:tea:

..8..

[another bob]

Thanks Bob.. *wipe my tears away*

To be honest with you I don't have the words to make you feel better, well I could have used the lovely tale of the siren, instead of a dirty windshield.

There's Always A Next Time...:tea:

..8..

Hello, 8!

About 2 decades ago I was living in Boston, and visiting with some friends one day, I was suddenly overwhelmed with a heavy sleepiness, and so excused myself and went into another room to lie down. I should mention that I never have auspicious dreams, though my Mate has them frequently. At any rate, as soon as I lay down I fell into a kind of waking dream, in which one of my spiritual "heroes" -- Bhagavan Nityananda -- suddenly appeared before me in a radiance of light and said in a clear voice: "Eight". After all these years, I remember the moment as if it just happened, but I'll be darned if I have any idea what it means. Still, I guess I now favor 8 when it comes to numbers, for what it's worth. Life is funny, eh . . .

:yo:

[Jenci]

It resists definition. Where do we dream? Where is a "place"? It is our own habitual activity which is separating, contracting, seeking, suffering, imagining, and calling all of this into form and giving it a kind of reality. When this is seen, felt, and welcomed without recoil, then our inherent freedom "resumes" as the ordinary and natural state of being.

:yo:

Beautfiul, thank you Bob.

Jeanette

[Jenci]

In Buddhism, for example, this is called The Wheel, and it spins us through innumerable dreamy births and deaths unceasingly until the fabric of the dream itself begins to wear thin, and then there is the possibility of Seeing.
I've been on this wheel for many lifetimes. I just know this. It's worn very thin and I am weary of it. Which is good, yes? ;)



Never once stopping to pull aside the curtain and unveil the Wizard at last, because the nature of Oz is so seductive, and those poppy fields are so very potent, and the last thing anybody really wants is to Awaken, despite all protests to the contrary, for to Awaken entails walking off that cliff and flinging oneself into the Unknown, and that is a terrifying prospect indeed, and so we remain asleep, cuddled up in the comfortable blankets of illusion
The awakening is to let go of everything and that means everything. Who wants that?

But in the end there is no choice, the wheel has done its work and there is nothing left but to let go of everything and step off the cliff.

You fall but you find that you have only landed on another ledge and you are still clinging to things you didn't realise that you had. So when you have had enough of this, you step off the cliff again, fall and then find yourself on another ledge and you discover you are still holding on to more......and so on........

If you are sincere with yourself about what you really want, you will do what needs to be done.

Jeanette

[Bo Atkinson]

I appreciated all the comments. They seem more real than the screen or electronics. Some morsels to savor today. Thanks.

For me it is a bit like playing a hand of cards. Or to move onwards?
Or to enter a new cosmic hand filled experience.
Or go back to 'go', collect, $tart over.
(Please, no offense to those hating the game metaphor).
'Gotta know when to hold it or when to fold it.
Suffering for art, (life is good).
wavy ego

[greybeard]

There is only the "dance"

Chris

[dim]

if there's only the seen then to whom he is referring to as "you" ?
and most importantly why he bothers ?

would you bother say anything if there's nobody here ?

[NeverMind]

From my POV, Not everyone sees the beauty -- I know many who would look at a vast area of natural beauty and see industrial money making land for cheap. To each their own. Not all can see what is coming through.

Unfortunately (for me), I have met quite a few such people myself.
(Many are - understandably, to a point - farmers, of the "old school", not really in tune with ecology. And people whom I tell this are almost invariably shocked, as if I were offending some sacred cow.
But the reality is, the beauty of nature seems to be a predominantly urban civilisational "discovery", datable back to the Renaissance, according to some. It's a very interesting topic, but off topic here. :-))


But of course, it's not just - or even predominantly - about a utilitarian point of view. This peculiar blindness is observable in the appreciation - or lack thereof - of human faces, or good modern art (not that there is a lot of that), to name just two examples.
Like you say, some people seem to be literally blind to the intricate order, or that sublime element that is coming through, for which we have no other name than just that, the sublime - or the transcendent.
(And it's just as well - words have a way of limiting and even debasing notions.)

Maybe that something coming through is a purely individual projection, although I doubt it.
But without it, no true beauty is possible, in my opinion or experience. It becomes just a composition of shapes.
Nothing wrong with that, I suppose, and there is even a definite, if eerie, pleasure in observing it "impartially".
But without that extra element coming through the enjoyment and bliss are gone, too.
And I like my enjoyment and bliss. :)


P.S. I've just reread my post. What a mess! Ignore it until I edit it with more intellectual rigour, OK? :-)

[another bob]

You fall but you find that you have only landed on another ledge and you are still clinging to things you didn't realise that you had. So when you have had enough of this, you step off the cliff again, fall and then find yourself on another ledge and you discover you are still holding on to more......and so on........

If you are sincere with yourself about what you really want, you will do what needs to be done.

Jeanette


So true, Thanks for the inspiration!


http://i41.tinypic.com/att91c.gif

:yo:

[another bob]

if there's only the seen then to whom he is referring to as "you" ?

You!

"The 'I' casts off the illusion of 'I' and yet remains as 'I'.
Such is the paradox of Self-realization. The realized
do not see any contradiction in it."

~Sri Ramana Maharshi



and most importantly why he bothers ?

For the sake of all who suffer the burden of their own delusion.



would you bother say anything if there's nobody here ?

There is somebody here -- who is that one? That's for each to discover themselves.

That discovery is the realization that you and God are not two.

It's the healing medicine we all seek.

However, there is still one more thing to realize.

It's like this:

“The mountains, rivers, earth,
grasses, trees and forests,
are always emanating a subtle,
precious light, day and night,
always emanating a subtle,
precious sound, demonstrating
and expounding to all people
the unsurpassed ultimate truth.

It is just because you miss it
right where you are, or avoid it
even as you face it, that you are
unable to attain actual use of it.

This is why Buddhism came into being,
with its many expedients and explanations,
with temporary and true, immediate and
gradual, half and full, partial and
complete teachings.

The words of the Buddha were intended
merely as efficacious expedients
for leading men out of the darkness
of worse ignorance.

It was as though one pretended
yellow leaves were gold
to stop the flow of a
child's tears.”



Monk protests: "But Master, yesterday you said that Mind is Buddha."

Ma Tsu: "That was like offering yellow leaves to a child and telling him it is gold---just to stop his crying."

Monk: "And what about when the child has stopped crying?"

Ma Tsu: "Then I say, Not Mind, Not Buddha, Not things!

‘The Mind is the Buddha’ is like medicine.
’No Mind, no Buddha’ is the cure for
those who are sick because of the medicine.”


:yo:

[dim]

if there's a you there's not only the seen then, right ? it's the seen and you.

[another bob]

if there's a you there's not only the seen then, right ? it's the seen and you.

No.

The seen and you are not two.

If you are trying to figure this out with mind, there will always be subject/object dichotomy. That is the nature of mind.

What is real is beyond fantasies of interpretation on perception, which are nothing other than the mind's activity, it's functioning.

However, if you do not separate from the activity, then the functioning itself is recognized as pure luminous spaciousness, without object.

It is just that itself -- seeing, seeing.

For example, when you are doing dishes, there is just the activity of dish doing -- nothing more. Superimposing a doer is adding something extra to reality, and it is that "something extra" which is the source of suffering.

Consequently, systems like Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta (to name two) are all about deconstructing that self-sense, revealing it for what it is.

Here's a pertinent piece in that regard:

In order to cut through the ambition of ego, we must understand how we set up me and my territory, how we use our projections as credentials to prove our existence. The source of the effort to confirm our solidity is an uncertainty as to whether or not we exist. Driven by this uncertainty, we seek to prove our own existence by finding a reference point outside ourselves, something with which to have a relationship, something solid to feel separate from. But the whole enterprise is questionable if we really look back and back and back. Perhaps we have perpetrated a gigantic hoax?

The hoax is the sense of the solidity of I and other. This dualistic fixation comes from nothingness. In the beginning there is open space, zero, self-contained, without relationship. But in order to confirm zeroness, we must create one to prove that zero exists. But even that is not enough; we might get stuck with just one and zero. So we begin to advance, venture out and out. We create two to confirm one's existence, and then we go out again and confirm two by three, three by four and so on. We set up a background, a foundation from which we can go on and on to infinity. This is what is called samsara, the continuous vicious cycle of confirmation of existence. One confirmation needs another confirmation needs another ...

The attempt to confirm our solidity is very painful. Constantly we find ourselves suddenly slipping off the edge of a floor which had appeared to extend endlessly. Then we must attempt to save ourselves from death by immediately building an extension to the floor in order to make it appear endless again. We think we are safe on our seemingly solid floor, but then we slip off again and have to build another extension. We do not realize that the whole process is unnecessary, that we do not need a floor to stand on, that we have been building all these floors on the ground level.

There was never any danger of falling or need for support. In fact, our occupation of extending the floor to secure our ground is a big joke, the biggest joke of all, a cosmic joke. But we may not find it funny: it may sound like a serious double cross.

To understand more precisely the process of confirming the solidity of I and other, that is, the development of ego, it is helpful to be familiar with the five skandhas, a set of Buddhist concepts which describe ego as a fivestep process.

The first step or skandha, the birth of ego, is called "form" or basic ignorance. We ignore the open, fluid, intelligent quality of space. When a gap or space occurs in our experience of mind, when there is a sudden glimpse of awareness, openness, absence of self, then a suspicion arises: "Suppose I find that there is no solid me? That possibility scares me. I don't want to go into that." That abstract paranoia, the discomfort that something may be wrong, is the source of karmic chain reactions. It is the fear of ultimate confusion and despair.

The fear of the absence of self, of the egoless state, is a constant threat to us. "Suppose it is true, what then? I am afraid to look." We want to maintain some solidity but the only material available with which to work is space, the absence of ego, so we try to solidify or freeze that experience of space. Ignorance in this case is not stupidity, but it is a kind of stubbornness. Suddenly we are bewildered by the discovery of selflessness and do not want to accept it, we want to hold on to something.

Then the next step is the attempt to find a way of occupying ourselves, diverting our attention from our aloneness. The karmic chain reaction begins. Karma is dependent upon the relativity of this and that my existence and my projections - and karma is continually reborn as we continually try to busy ourselves. In other words, there is a fear of not being confirmed by our projections. One must constantly try to prove that one does exist by feeling one's projections as a solid thing. Feeling the solidity of something seemingly outside you reassures you that you are a solid entity as well. This is the second skandha, "feeling."

In the third stage, ego develops three strategies or impulses with which to relate to its projections: indifference, passion and aggression. These impulses are guided by perception. Perception, in this case, is the self-conscious feeling that you must officially report back to
central headquarters what is happening in any given moment. Then you can manipulate each situation by organizing another strategy.

In the strategy of indifference, we numb any sensitive areas that we want to avoid, that we think might hurt us. We put on a suit of armor. The second strategy is passion - trying to grasp things and eat them up. It is a magnetizing process. Usually we do not grasp if we feel rich enough. But whenever there is a feeling of poverty, hunger, impotence, then we reach out, we extend our tentacles and attempt to hold onto something.

Aggression, the third strategy, is also based upon the experience of poverty, the feeling that you cannot survive and therefore must ward off anything that threatens your property or food. Moreover, the more aware you are of the possibilities of being threatened, the more desperate your reaction becomes. You try to run faster and faster in order to find a way of feeding or defending yourself. This speeding about is a form of aggression. Aggression, passion, indifference are part of the third skandha, "perception /impulse."

Ignorance, feeling, impulse and perception -all are instinctive processes. We operate a radar system which senses our territory. Yet we cannot establish ego properly without intellect, without the ability to conceptualize and name. By now we have an enormously rich collection of things going on inside us. Since we have so many things happening, we begin to categorize them, putting them into certain pigeon-holes, naming them. We make it official, so to speak. So "intellect" or "concept" is the next stage of ego, the fourth skandha, but even this is not quite enough. We need a very active and efficient mechanism to keep the instinctive and intellectual processes of ego coordinated. That is the last development of ego, the fifth skandha, "consciousness."

Consciousness consists of emotions and irregular thought patterns, all of which taken together form the different fantasy worlds with which we occupy ourselves. These fantasy worlds are referred to in the scriptures as the "six realms." The emotions are the highlights of ego, the generals of ego's army; subconscious thought, daydreams and other thoughts connect one highlight to another. So thoughts form ego's army and are constantly in motion, constantly busy. Our thoughts are neurotic in the sense that they are irregular, changing direction all the time and overlapping one another. We continually jump from one thought to the next, from spiritual thoughts to sexual fantasies to money matters to domestic thoughts and so on. The whole development of the five skandhas-ignorance/form, feeling, impulse/perception, concept and consciousness is an attempt on our part to shield ourselves from the truth of our insubstantiality.

The practice of meditation is to see the transparency of this shield. But we cannot immediately start dealing with the basic ignorance itself; that would be like trying to push a wall down all at once. If we want to take this wall down, we must take it down brick by brick; we start with immediately available material, a stepping stone. So the practice of meditation starts with the emotions and thoughts, particularly with the thought process.

~Chogyam Trungpa
Cosmic Joke

:yo:

[leavesoftrees]

Thanks for this thread, Another Bob

I remember an exercise where one looks at one's personality as a mischievous pet or child. It occurs to me that when one does this one has separated one's identity from the personality or ego. Who is that one now, if the separation is successful. And where is he?

[another bob]

Thanks for this thread, Another Bob

I remember an exercise where one looks at one's personality as a mischievous pet or child. It occurs to me that when one does this one has separated one's identity from the personality or ego. Who is that one now, if the separation is successful. And where is he?


Hiya Leaves!

Jenci just submitted a useful post here that elaborates on this:

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?860-Enlightenment-The-Ego-what-is-it-How-to-transcend-it./page79

post #1557

:yo:

[Jenci]

You fall but you find that you have only landed on another ledge and you are still clinging to things you didn't realise that you had. So when you have had enough of this, you step off the cliff again, fall and then find yourself on another ledge and you discover you are still holding on to more......and so on........

If you are sincere with yourself about what you really want, you will do what needs to be done.

Jeanette


So true, Thanks for the inspiration!


http://i41.tinypic.com/att91c.gif

:yo:


LOL, the rabbit is perfect. That's me that rabbit and I am content with that. :)

Jeanette

[greybeard]

This is the thread to "Be"

Chris

[another bob]

You fall but you find that you have only landed on another ledge and you are still clinging to things you didn't realise that you had. So when you have had enough of this, you step off the cliff again, fall and then find yourself on another ledge and you discover you are still holding on to more......and so on........

If you are sincere with yourself about what you really want, you will do what needs to be done.

Jeanette


So true, Thanks for the inspiration!


http://i41.tinypic.com/att91c.gif

:yo:


LOL, the rabbit is perfect. That's me that rabbit and I am content with that. :)

Jeanette


Hehe, excellent, though remember, things change, and nothing is at it appears (at least for very long). . .


http://i39.tinypic.com/25f3z4l.gif

:yo:

[TraineeHuman]

[T]his waking world can be seen not as a place or world, but an indefinite dimension that is not fixed like any object, but fluidly manifesting as a play of infinite possibility ...


The wake dream is no different than the sleeping dreams except the "laws" of our density somehow got into our subconsciousness. But in reality the two work on all the same principles - the waking dream just needs to follow the laws of the plane the dream is on (at least for now ;-)...

Nothing is what it seems. Not a single thought, conception, or experience, high or low, is anything but a modification of dreams, a hallucination...
It is always an event in Consciousness, [in] the vastness of which every thing that appears is simply a modification....

We do not know what any of this is! We have a lot of ideas, but when they are investigated, they turn out to be based upon a notion of mistaken identity....

Everything else is subject to interpretation, but the simple fact of Awareness is our irreducible inheritance....


When I was eighteen I came to a similar conclusion. It seemed clear that, when it comes to knowing what reality is, all we have is guesses all the time. Guesses on top of guesses.

The irony is, there is no way to determine how accurate the guesses are. It's like the guesses are "appearance", but they're the closest we -- or God, etc --can ever get to the "reality" which we'd like to think is buried somewhere underneath. But there's simply no such thing. The entire world we think we know is built out of nothing but guesses. And reality is not only unknowable but it would be far too elusive for the guesses to be accurate anyway.

Every word we speak is a pure guess, but words were probably first invented to make it look safe and respectable. Every moment of our lives is one more variation of the story of The Emperor's New Clothes. And yet, somehow the light of awareness shines on it all and somehow gives it all infinite significance.

[another bob]

Every moment of our lives is one more variation of the story of The Emperor's New Clothes. And yet, somehow the light of awareness shines on it all and somehow gives it all infinite significance.

The way of life lived consciously involves working intimately with our viewpoints. We do that just like we work with our thoughts in meditation practice, for example. Meditation in action is much more potent than sitting on a cushion. It's a 24/7 prospect, this taking responsibility for our perspective. Sometimes it feels like we're working with filaments of light, and at other times a pit of snakes. The mind is a chameleon. As we come clear, we learn to simply recognize, "This is just a viewpoint. It's not me. This viewpoint has arisen in this circumstance. I do have a feeling about it, but it's not the absolute truth. It's just a viewpoint."

When we understand that this is a viewpoint that comes from conditions, a fantasy actually of intepretation on perception, when we train ourselves minutely in our daily lives to pay attention and understand our viewpoints are just viewpoints, this makes a tremendous difference in how we live. When we don't try to protect or justify our viewpoints, suddenly there's freedom, and a spaciousness for real happiness to blossom in our lives.

:yo:

[dim]

You first say there's only the seen
then you say there's you also
then you say the seen and you are one
and then you say don't try to figure it out
and you insist that this helps somebody out of suffering.
I wonder...

[TraineeHuman]

"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed, in the cognized, there is only the cognized. Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here; this is how you should train yourself...”

~Bahiya Sutta



Although I certainly appreciate and agree with many things you have expressed so eloquently, Bob, there’s one major point I strongly disagree on.

You list six types of sensory experience. These include “the sensed”. Let’s take a look at the sense of simply existing. – Ah, how sweet it feels. –
I’d like to make the following claims about it.

Firstly, it underlies and gives credibility to everything that’s sensed.

Secondly, it has a physical component, but along with that physical feeling in the body there’s an awareness component. And when I say awareness, I mean the Awareness you write about, the one that underlies everything else. Most people are aware of it only dimly, and are continually denying to themselves that they in fact are aware of it.

Thirdly, this sense is the one thing each of us can be totally certain of. It underpins everything we do.

Fourthly, because it’s Awareness, it’s beyond any distinction between subject and object, between sensing and sensed, between I and me.

When sensing senses itself alone, I claim it goes beyond senser and sensed, because the act of pure sensing pulls itself up by its own bootstraps, so to speak. It’s the royal road.

[another bob]

You first say there's only the seen
then you say there's you also
then you say the seen and you are one
and then you say don't try to figure it out
and you insist that this helps somebody out of suffering.
I wonder...

Wonder is the dawn of wisdom, according to Sri Nisargadatta, and I certainly agree. To be steadily and consistently wondering is true spiritual practice!

:yo:

[another bob]

"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed, in the cognized, there is only the cognized. Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here; this is how you should train yourself...”

~Bahiya Sutta



Although I certainly appreciate and agree with many things you have expressed so eloquently, Bob, there’s one major point I strongly disagree on.

You list six types of sensory experience. These include “the sensed”. Let’s take a look at the sense of simply existing. – Ah, how sweet it feels. –
I’d like to make the following claims about it.

Firstly, it underlies and gives credibility to everything that’s sensed.

Secondly, it has a physical component, but along with that physical feeling in the body there’s an awareness component. And when I say awareness, I mean the Awareness you write about, the one that underlies everything else. Most people are aware of it only dimly, and are continually denying to themselves that they in fact are aware of it.

Thirdly, this sense is the one thing each of us can be totally certain of. It underpins everything we do.

Fourthly, because it’s Awareness, it’s beyond any distinction between subject and object, between sensing and sensed, between I and me.

When sensing senses itself alone, I claim it goes beyond senser and sensed, because the act of pure sensing pulls itself up by its own bootstraps, so to speak. It’s the royal road.

Good Evening, my Friend!

Wise words as usual, however you are actually conflating a few things here, since what is being referred to by Buddha in the Sutta is specifically the skandha of sensation itself. Trungpa touches on it in the post above (#29), but essentially "feeling" in this context is simply like a filter that is always modifying one's perception of the external world of "form," categorizing phenomena as either desirable, undesirable, or neutral.

:yo:

[another bob]

Good Day, Friends!

To clarify the questions some have expressed about this subject, it occurred to me to share with you the Anattalakkhana Sutta, Buddha's second exposition of the Dharma, after he first expounded the Four Noble Truths:

"This is how I’ve heard it: The Fortunate One was living in the deer park at Isipatana near Varanasi. There, he addressed his five companions, the bhikkhus to whom he’d taught the Four Noble Truths:

‘Bhikkhus, material form is not-self. If form were self, then form would not be a condition for the arising of dukkha [dissatisfaction/suffering]. Further, it should then be possible to control form; to determine, through an act of will, that my self should take such-and-such a form; that it should not take some other form. But since form is not-self, it is a condition for the arising of dukkha and it is not possible to alter form through acts of self-control. Feeling, bhikkhus, is not-self, and for the same reasons. If feeling were self, it would not be a condition for the arising of dukkha, and it would be possible to say, ‘May I have just these feelings, and not those others.’ But since feeling is not-self, it does lead to dukkha, and it is not possible to alter feelings through acts of self-control.

‘Perception, bhikkhus, is not-self, for the same reasons. … Since it serves as a foundation for dukkha, and since it is not possible to say, ‘I will perceive just this, but not that other,’ therefore perception is not-self.

‘Mental formations, bhikkhus, are not-self. Therefore, they serve as a foundation for the arising of dukkha, and we are unable to say, ‘Let me have just these mental formations, and not those others.’

‘Consciousness, bhikkhus, is not-self. If consciousness were self, it would not lead to the arising of dukkha, and it would be possible to say, ‘Let me just be conscious of this part of experience, and not of that other.’ But since consciousness is not-self, it does lead to the arising of dukkha, and it is not possible to say, ‘Let me just be conscious of this, and not of that.’

‘Bhikkhus, tell me what you think: is form permanent or impermanent?’

‘It is impermanent, Master.’

‘Now, that which is impermanent, is that unsatisfactory or satisfactory?’

‘It is unsatisfactory, Master.’

‘Now, does it make sense to regard something that’s impermanent, unsatisfying, subject to change, with the understanding, ‘This is mine; this is what I am; this is my self’?’

‘Of course not.’

‘What about feelings, perceptions, mental formations? Are these permanent or impermanent.’

‘They are impermanent.’

‘Can they be counted on to satisfy, or are they ultimately unsatisfying.’

‘Unsatisfying, Master.’

‘So, does it make sense to regard these things, which are impermanent, unsatisfying, subject to change, with the understanding, ‘This is mine; this is what I am; this is my self.’?’

‘Definitely not, Master.’

‘And consciousness; is that permanent, or impermanent?’

‘Impermanent.’

‘In the long run, is it satisfying or unsatisfying?’

‘Unsatisfying.’

‘This consciousness, then – impermanent, unsatisfying, subject to change – does it make sense to say, ‘This is mine; this is what I am; this is my self.’?’

‘That makes no sense, Master.’

‘So there you have it, bhikkhus. Whatever form may have existed in the past; whatever form may come to exist in the future; whatever form exists right now, whether internal or external, obvious or subtle, gross or spiritual, immediate or dispersed – if you regard that form with proper understanding, face up to the reality of the situation, you must see ‘This is not mine; this is not what I am; this is not my self.’

‘In the same way, bhikkhus, you must regard feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness. Whatever of this nature existed in the past, whatever will exist in the future, whatever exists right now, whether internal or external, whether obvious or subtle, whether gross or spiritual, whether immediate or diffuse, all that must be regarded thus: ‘This is all not mine; this is none of what I am; nothing of this is my self.’

‘Bhikkhus, the ennobled student who has received this instruction, seen things in this way, becomes weary of form, becomes weary of feeling, of perception, of mental formations, of consciousness. Grown weary of all that, he loses interest in it. Losing interest, he becomes dispassionate. And when his passion dissipates, he becomes free. Finally free, he awakens to the knowledge: Freedom!. He knows, ‘what came to be is now gone; the holy life has been lived; what had to be done is done; I’m not going through this again.”


:yo: