Eviander

How do you explain what is supposed to be the unexplainable?

Kind of a good thread imo.

If you don't get the point then the irony lies on you..

Ya, they do, there' called 'countries'.

Haha..where so free that we are almost forced to depend on the state for everything...even freedom itself!

I have not done enough research..but I have seen pictures and videos regarding such..and would not be surprised if they where real. Governments will go to great extents to maintain domination...

Maybe you should try putting time into practicing lucid dreaming instead of examining your dreams...

Then you can examine your subconscious mind directly.

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/200...ity-by-ken.html

 

Excerpt from The Simple Feeling of Being

 

From Chapter 1: The Witness

 

 

Great passage.

But to the OP you can easily find books about this subject by people much more liable to answer to the question than I am..but to sum it up in a few words it seems to be that you are consciousness..that has no time or limitations.

I do seem to find advaita vedanta really nails this point better than any other philosophy..

IMO the whole enlightenment industry is a marketing hoax.

Sure...the east has a lot of special disciplines hidden from the western world..including these Taoists who can light a paper on fire with their chi (John Chang, for instance) but this has nothing to do with enlightenment..it simply has to do with practicing secret methods in a very subversive and suppressed world.

Binaural beat programs are wonderful and highly effective while you are using them, but it is very easy to develop a dependency on them for achieving altered states of consciousness since they do nothing for building up the kind of discipline that is required to get there normally or to get to even more advanced states. So use them, but just keep that in mind. Eventually you will hit a brick wall and will need to go back to square one to build up your natural access-concentration without the aid. And believe me, it can be disappointing when you have to just sit with nothing happening for several months in basic training, while knowing that a program could shift you into a jhana in a few minutes.

Yes I am aware of this.

I'm using them as a stepping stone though..

I believe this will increase my concentration for naked meditations.

Has the OP ever tried meditation or anything he is criticizing before?

J/W..because if your going to approach something scientifically you should obviously know you need to test your hypothesis before you make a conclusion

At one point individuality must be realized as a lie. Sure we have individual experiences, but we are not our experiences.

 

Love,

Carson

 

Seperation exists but it is not Reality

That's it.

There is no such thing as an "individual" essence.....that is ego and it is not Real.

 

Love,

Carson

Well..at one point individuality must be realized. For instance the fact that we are experiencing the vibrations of reality from separate minds or filters is an expression of the fact that a kind of unified separation exists.

Sorry Eviander....

 

I shouldn't have posted so quickly and should have properly wrote what I meant before posting. I editted like 5 times to get the wording that more adaquately portrays my point.

 

What I meant was "The thought that suffering is mandatory and death is final is an illusion....a lie."

 

All things are impermanent, so happiness is in a sense an illusion if you define happiness as a static state. But REAL happiness is not static....it is flowing...it is all encompassing Bliss no matter the circumstances. It is our true nature. But yes, happiness is DEFINED individually.....but when experienced it is Universal

 

Love,

Carson

Well said.

But how could an individual essence be experienced as a universal?

What is death?

 

Suffering is individual. What is suffering for one is Bliss for another. Suffering to me is not resting in my True Nature, which is (for me) Pure Bliss Conciousness.

 

Love,

Carson

 

Both suffering and death are illusions.

By your standards then..happiness must also be an illusion. Since happiness is the cessation of an illusory condition called suffering.

But yes I agree on one thing..suffering is individual. That must also mean happiness to is individual..which puts us back at point 1.

But death is only in form..this I am sure you also agree with..for consciousness as we all should know..is timeless.

The cessation of all suffering....IMO anyways

 

Love,

Carson

So death is happiness?

That definition has to be extended before it can be fulfilled.

What is suffering?

"There are no universal truths" isn't that itself a universal truth?

Indeed it is.

Again..words fail ontology..wisdom is not knowledge.

edit-

I would like to suggest that "real happiness" is a subjective attribute..since everyone has different value judgments and standards for what they consider happiness to be.

So what is real happiness then?

We speak of different topics. Your question is aimed at egos who think realization is going to be found in the future and by sadhana.

 

My question is aimed at people who can already see the illusion inherent in all problems, but still get entranced and pulled in by egoic thought forms.

Well said. In this light I do believe meditation is a good way to quite the mind. I actually downloaded some binaural tracks to aid me in such, which helps the brain access gamma states of consciousness quicker.

Lucid dreaming and Astral projection do seem to be the best ways for discovering your reality.

I actually just started seriously recording my dreams every night after I was doing it and stopped for awhile..which is why I haven't became lucid yet.

As for astral projection..well..I still have much work to do..

A better question:

Is there anything to even realize except for the problems you create while trying to find realization?

I think it is one of the only religions or schools of thought that claims to be in existence in multiple "world systems" or galaxies and solar systems. At least in my knowledge that is.

I meant the different Buddhist traditions, not all religious traditions.

Your talking about Hinduism. Buddhism was a peaceful counter culture uprising of the times. King Ashoka is one king that comes to mind that is a good example of a totalitarian gone good due to the influence of Buddhism in his life.

Of course I was talking about Hinduism (sorry I was confused, I thought we were talking about other religions, not just different sects of Buddhism).

Buddhism and Christianity is very, very different. People are people, but the spiritual tradition of Buddhism is a boat in an entirely different ocean. Unless you want to get into the possibility that Jesus went to North India during the missing 30 years and possibly learned some Buddhism, then brought that wisdom back and explained it through parables?? Who knows?? Or even the possibility that he didn't even exist arises as well. Anyway, you probably saw Zeitgeist? I'm just guessing. Well that movie totally misrepresents Buddhism, as the Buddha was not born of a virgin, etc. but that movie does a good job with the Western religions.

Yea I've figured the same thing about Jesus (that he was a trained monk) I saw that somewhere but forgot. Anyways different subject of course. I know Buddhism is a lot fluffier than most religions..but really...I am not dissing the Buddha..only the religion that followed the teacher. I did see zeitgeist though..I don't remember much about it or Buddhism being connected to it.

It helps to have the conditions of integration so that one can enact that inner silence in the world of noise and seemingly random occurrences. Otherwise it's just a mechanism of escape.

So your offering me a crutch for this broken leg..when really..I wake up to realize I only broke it in a dream?

That's how it started. If you read lots of the old translations from the early 20th century, you get that kind of Theistic impression about Buddhism, a kind of Christian glaze over. I have a translation of the poems of Milarepa published by Penguin where the term God I think is used here and there, which would be a total mistranslation. I guess it served it's purpose of a slow and less shocking introduction, which is one that is loosing credence. These days, Vajrayana has some pure disseminators who teach the nitty gritty. The Dalai Lama has some books available that go into some of the more detailed aspects of the Dharma.

I don't wish to create suffering from a logical (or maybe illogical?) paradigm.

But, Buddhism is different from your examples in that it is a philosophy that without the teaching words doesn't add up to much. Reading the words intently couldn't help but change a mind and lead it to meditation with the right intentions and view points. Unless your a brick wall of course. Qigong and Hatha Yoga are different, in that they are body practices for the mind, but through the avenue of the body, so of course one would need more so to do a lot more doing than reading. Buddhism at it's core is mind to mind and the mind responds to concepts and ideas. It responds to body movements as well, but how to utilize this energy in a day to day fashion needs some integrating concepts, which is why the philosophy of yoga is taught as well as the postures.

Of course..meditation on the dharma..I know..it is indeed a meditative religion..one in which you literally self hypnotize yourself when your more auto-suggestible in trance or meditation.

It seems that your problem might be connected with your christian family..and associating your parents with Christianity. This might be a problem with anyone looking to break away from their family dogma..but..it looks like you believe pretty much in the eastern definition of god...though it might be better to label what your talking about (which is simply consciousness or 'the Tao' to be relevant to this forum) as something else other than god..which in my opinion has many negative connotations in the English speaking world.

How many? I don't know. I've been reading Buddhism along with all other religions for 20 years now. Enlightenment is defined by the passification of psychological suffering and liberation from unconscious rebirth. Period. That's in every tradition. It's expanded upon in different ways in different traditions.

Like I said, in the history of the East, there have been successful Monarchy's. Not perfect, but successful. Including in Nepal and Bhutan. Tibet has had it's share of up's and down's as well. There have also been some Indian Dharma Kings in history that were successful..

So enlightenment is really only the disintegration of the ego which was created through socialization. For it is only your ego that causes you suffering..it created the concept in the first place. As for unconscious rebirth...that varies in various traditions..for example in hermeticism I don't get reincarnated as a fish or another human..I pass onto the astral plane..in other religions...well..the fear to believe is much worse of course. I know India had monarchies though..it's religion was created to justify their existence.

bunching all religions into one because of your past bad subjective experiences of a certain religion here in the West isn't very wise. sure religions aren't perfect because they are afterall run by humans and are prone to err but that doesn't necessarily equate them all, and there could be some religions that are less corrupt, more evolved, and more practical than others.

 

if you don't follow a path, then who are you going to follow? your own deluded mind? yeah that's a better guide

It has nothing to do with past experiences..I have only had/still have bad experiences with Christianity..which does not mean I'm going to go jump into the boat of another religion just because it came from the east.

I follow the path of silence..which is un-deluded by any minds.

Buddhism is different than other traditions in that it's not as important to read the original texts. This is very important and not understood by many, so I'll reiterate. Most religions stress the original teachings and the importance of them, we in the West are all about getting to the source because we are aware of corruption we know humans. Christians need to read the original words of Christ because that is very important to them, Christ is their figure, he is their God. Buddha is not the God here, we are not really interested in him as a person. it's more about his actual methodology that we are concerned with. and this methodology travels through time, adapating to cultures and mindsets.

 

The Buddha taught to people who are very different than people today. Not to say that people then didn't have the same desires for eternal peace and the same attachments to the illusory self. But rather the mindsets were different. Thats why there is an evolution of Buddhism where enlightened masters sort of change things up, the core remaining the same, to adapt to the changing times of humanity. So reading the original suttas might be very useful indeed, but finding a living enlightened master is even better. That's because the master, already understanding the core of Buddhism, is a living embodiment of Buddhism, and therefore is able to practically and skillfully teach you that core. the Suttas cannot do that.

 

I recommend people to read books like "What makes you not a Buddhist" instead of saying go read the Pali Suttas because I sincerely feel that it is much more pragmatic to trust a living teacher who understands our mindset rather than reading ancient scriptures, which are wonderful but can be very difficult to understand for most.

Actually it depends on the school of Buddhism...but anyways talking to a llama would be better for those interested of course. Here in the west I would assume Buddhism is dampened so the ex-christian masses can more easily accept it.

I think that the "opiate of the masses" argument put forth by Marx and Engles was made pretty much worthless after we got a chance to see what communism did with their atheist states. The situation was and is absolutely no better. In fact, I think that it is worse in many ways, since people tend to not have strong sources of hope and they have no basic ethical model to guide their lives. Like it or not, socially proscribed ethics and morality is very important for societies to run smoothly, even if these things can sometimes be restrictive for the spiritually inclined minority. I would personally be terrified to live in a country made up purely of existentialists, even though I love the study of existentialism and personally believe in many of its tenants. I just do not have that much faith in the masses, I guess, to suggest that everyone think that there is no absolute right or wrong. Maybe this is just the high school teacher in me.

 

Totalitarian governments exist plentifully in countries with Christianity, Buddhism, Atheism, and practically any other -ism. Even an (agnostic) democratic state can run into some pretty horrible tyranny of the majority. This is a universal societal problem that every group most fight to counter, no matter what the predominant religion or belief might be.

Communism has never been instituted properly so it's hard to make that analysis. So that does not invalidate the argument that religion is a opiate for the masses...especially with the influx of modern psychological studies and science. But this political discussion is really off topic..I don't know if it should be brought into this thread. And yes I agree...governments use different tactics as time and understanding develop.

Uh hu... and it has enlightened countless beings. I like this organised religion better than I like disorganized and chaotic thinking plaguing the world. This organized religion has incredible time tested methods and a clear morality that works with the natural psychology of humanity.

 

I'm glad your opinion is merely that and not a fact.

 

Some people just like to see the bad.

How many Buddhist texts have you read? because honestly..I was interested in Buddhism till I bought the texts and read them. I'm not sure what enlightenment your talking about either..because there are various definitions of enlightenment coming from different traditions. But yes..it is indeed my opinion.

A Monarchy isn't always a bad thing. This has recently been considered a bad thing due to the Western Capitalist and highly flawed system of Democracy where the ignorant are brain washed into who to vote for through popular consumerist culture propaganda feeding stations called Tell-a-lie-vision, that is taking over the world. There have in fact been very just Kings in the history of the East and even recently.

From my viewpoint governments always carry bad things with them. Monarchy being one of it's worst manifestations (king/queen represented as god and goddess figures..their human where human..its hogwash..ect.)

Meaning, anyone can cultivate the Buddha Dharma, what they do with it is all according to their own mind.

Alright. The same goes for any religion, but I think our points have been disclosed.