dwai

Concierge
  • Content count

    7,875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    62

About dwai

  • Rank
    Tadekam evadvitiyam

Recent Profile Visitors

23,273 profile views
  1. So interesting. Yet it is the Buddhists who say “kshanikam kshanikam sarvam kshanikam” and the advaitins who say, “sarvam khalu idam brahma”
  2. Those who are ready to understand will do so It feels like no thing
  3. That’s the irony - everyone is always “experiencing” that absolute. The misunderstanding about what *it* is, is what causes the aforementioned confusion. PS - I wrote “experiencing” in quotes because I there’s not really experiencing “it” per se - all experience is because of it. So the old question of “how does one know one has eyes?” is applicable here.
  4. Why is the Two Reality model so difficult to reconcile? The problem stems from the following perspective - As beings operating inside one of the realities (relative reality level), we are used to using the subject-object framework to operate. What is the subject-object framework? You, the subject, experience phenomena (objects) - things are created, they are destroyed, living beings are born, and then they die; there might be attributes of nature that exist at a larger timescale than our limited presence in the phenomenal world, but we see those too change and transform (dramatically sometimes) - rivers that have flowed for thousands of years might run dry, mountains might collapse due to tectonic movements in the earth's crust, and so on. Given this, you (and by *you* I mean all of us) operate continuously as a subject relative to objects you experience. In such a scenario, the possibility of a Reality outside the scope of this phenomenal world seems unfathomable. Indeed, when we are using language to communicate this information, it adds to the confusion even more. We are taking phenomenal objects (words, thoughts, language itself) to try and articulate something that lies outside the remit of phenomena. The "other" reality, one that is often called the Absolute Reality, is the one that stands without a second, or in other words, is not affected by the appearance or disappearance of objects. What is such a reality? Referring to it as a "thing" is a language limitation - because it is not a *thing*. Why is it not a thing? Because it can never become an object. It is pure objectless consciousness - the ground of all things. How is it the ground of all things? Because all things (objects) appear and disappear in it. The problem is a category mistake. You seek to understand it as an object—expect to see/study its properties when it doesn't have any. But it is the very thing that enables you to seek, observe, and know.
  5. Why am I not Enlightened?

    No offense taken, nor given. I'm merely trying to show you that these are metaphysical cosmological concepts - there's no woo-woo involved here. Or one could say, that yin-yang is present at relative levels across the spectrum. I'd seen a very nice illustration of how yin-yang works in progressively smaller scales - some may call it a series of differentials. Yin-yang are not mutually exclusive - they are interrelated. Yin contains the seed of yang, and yang contains the seed of yin. Absolute yang gives rise to Yin. And absolute yin gives rise to yang. The duality is only apparent. Not at all - I just felt that you didn't understand the concept, so I thought I'd help elucidate it for you.
  6. Why am I not Enlightened?

    That is yin-yang in play. So what? Heat expands, The principle of expansion is called Yang. Gravity attracts - the principle of attraction is called yin. There can of course be a force that pushes apart - how do you think rockets escape earth’s gravity? There is nothing to believe or disbelieve - these are metaphysical concepts - one has to understand them.
  7. Why am I not Enlightened?

    What do you call the movement of a fluid from a higher pressure area to lower pressure area? Yin and yang are always present and accessible to us. We just need to properly attune our senses to see and the intellect to discern. Yin/Yang are not some abstract concepts - heat expands - Yang, cold contracts - yin. Gravity attracts - yin, and so on… Yin-yang interplay is that substantial and insubstantial are always trying to attain balance. That is constantly underway at physical, mental, and spiritual levels.
  8. Dao Bums (here i am)

    shhh...that's a secret UAV
  9. Dao Bums (here i am)

    Do tell about the shiny orb ... What a co-incidence, so do I
  10. The dharma traditions use a 2-truth Reality to reconcile True Nature, which is changeless (or empty depending on the specific path within the dharma family), and the manifest world of phenomena hinged on change. The model states as follows - There is an absolute reality which is beyond all categories and labels, names and forms, and is ever free, and is beyond space and time (and therefore change). This is our True Nature - pure consciousness. It is existence itself, it is being itself, it is peace/bliss itself. There is a phenomenal world, in which beings (such as you and me) come into existence, live out their lives, and die. This is the world of change - there is nothing permanent about this world except change itself. This is called the Relative Reality. How then can one reconcile the two? If one is true, the other must be false, right? Can there actually be two truths? The confusion is because we operate in this phenomenal world, and that which is called Absolute Reality isn't apparent at all. So, when we experience all phenomena (basically anything that is subject to change, has a beginning and end is called a phenomenon) - we can't really find anything changeless there. The confusion occurs as a consequence of looking for a "thing". Absolute Reality is not a thing. How then can one recognize/realize this Absolute Reality? (more later)
  11. Why am I not Enlightened?

    One could say that Motion is a consequence of change, and change is the interplay of yin and yang.
  12. Why am I not Enlightened?

    How serendipitous. I was recently pondering about Time - What is time? When we say we can “observe” time change, Is it really the case? Can we observe time or we infer time by observing phenomena? Is the phenomenon of rotation of the earth around its axis the same as time? Is the revolution of the earth around the sun also the same as time? Time to me seems to be like an “āvařaňa” (a veil) that obscures and obfuscates “the reality” by the way of changes. We presume/impute its existence by observing changes in phenomena. In that sense, time seems more like māyā imho. It is a veil - it neither exists nor does it not exist - or it is anirvachaniya. When we peer through the changes to find the changeless, is it real? And yet we know that the changeless is unaffected by it, but still even those who have Brahma sakshåtkāra cannot deny it relatively speaking.