forestofclarity

I would agree that my nature is also (ultimately) awareness, but also (relative) ignorance arises within awareness. For example, during dreaming and deep sleep.

I'll give one perspective on this: The first question: what is the problem? Without identifying the problem properly, any attempt at a solution is bound to fail. In the path of knowing, jnani yoga or buddhist prajna, the problem is ignorance (avidya or ajnana). If this is the problem, then the solution must be knowledge (vidya or jnana or prajna). So it is entirely possible to be action-less while remaining in ignorance. But knowledge of what? Generally, it is knowing the true nature of one's mind. Fortunately, the 1) knowing and 2) what is to be known is already right here, so indeed there is nothing more to be added or gained (on the path of knowing anyway). However, I agree that practices, diets, yogas, and actions themselves do not necessarily lead to knowledge, I do think they can make knowledge more likely. How so? By reducing the solidifying, dark inducing aspects of ignorance, i.e. tamoguna. Also, the mind tends to be quite agitated, flitting from here to there--- i.e. rajoguna. So if the mind is stirred up and sleepy, it will be difficult to see what the mind is, and it will be difficult to fix the attention where we want to fix it. So certain practices may render the mind more clear and sattvic and our attention more secure, in which case it will be easier to know the truth. These would be supportive practices. But this might not be right for someone pursuing theistic devotion, or action oriented good works, etc.

You are re-Steved (but with a small s).

One issue is that people often assume compassion is something to be gained. From certain Buddhist points of view, compassion arises naturally from our minds and everything anyone does is due to seeking happiness from oneself or others. Being selfish is actually imposed upon us, through ignorance and timeless mental habits. So in this view, ignorance blocks our compassion. Emptiness dissolves our sense of self and our feeling of being bounded and separated from others. Once dissolved, this compassion flows freely.

Three Aspects of The Absolute. Folio from a manuscript of the ''Shri Nath Charit'' by Bulaki. Jodhpur, 1823. Mehrangarh Museum Trust

Like this thread, but open to all traditions. Self Liberation Through Seeing with Naked Awareness, trans John Myrdhin Reynolds As for this sparkling awareness, which is called "mind," Even though one says that it exists, it does not actually exist. (On the other hand) as a source, it is the origin of the diversity of all the bliss of Nirvana and all of the sorrow of Samsara. And as for it’s being something desirable; it is cherished alike in the Eleven Vehicles. With respect to its having a name, the various names that are applied to it are inconceivable (in their numbers). Some call it "the nature of the mind" or "mind itself." Some Tirthikas call it by the name Atman or "the Self." The Sravakas call it the doctrine of Anatman or "the absence of a self." The Chittamatrins call it by the name Chitta or "the Mind." Some call it the Prajnaparamita or "the Perfection of Wisdom." Some call it the name Tathagata-garbha or "the embryo of Buddhahood." Some call it by the name Mahamudra or "the Great Symbol." Some call it by the name "the Unique Sphere." Some call it by the name Dharmadhatu or "the dimension of Reality." Some call it by the name Alaya or "the basis of everything." And some simply call it by the name "ordinary awareness."

I don't think there is a strict division between "enlightened" and "not enlightened"--- it is on a spectrum. One classic Advaitic definition is that realization starts with tattva jnana, or knowing reality, followed by manonasa, the destruction of the mind (in this case, the mind's thinkative and clinging nature) and a thinning of mental habits, vasana kshaya. This thinkative mind and mental habits is usually what we take to be "us," so the '"you" is in the way. The result is the natural cessation of fear, doubt, and suffering. The usual indications are a lack of reactivity, spontaneity, an expansive view, etc. The mechanical habits of mind is very apparent in most of us, and the lack of it also seems apparent.

Every few years I find myself, inevitably, drawn to reading or receiving teachings on a few books over and over. They seem to expand every time I read them or receive teachings on them. Some of them are mysterious, like the Dao De Jing. Others are more straight forward, like the Path of Sri Ramana by Sadhu Om. Others are both, like Self Liberation Through Seeing With Naked Awareness. Each time I almost feel like I'm reading something quite different, which is of course a reflection of my own mind. I'd be curious to hear about specific books or teachings others return to over and again.

This forum (and others online) sometimes makes me incredibly sad. This is a forum of dedicated spiritual practitioners and yet we cannot get along or act like adults in the most simplistic sense: i.e., refrain from insults, refrain from trolling others, try not to hurt people, or follow a few simple rules. Creating a post takes time and can be edited or removed. Everything here is entirely intentional. So if this is the best we can do, well, no wonder the world is in the shape it's in.

** Currently left unlocked since this is generalized discussion **

** Locked for review **

From time to time, I like to vary my learning up by learning about Advaita. Usually these days, this means listening to Swami Sarvapriyananda. One thing that has come up again that doesn't make sense to me is the idea of chidabhasa, reflected consciousness. The way it is described by Swami S is fairly in line with how it is presented by Swami Chinmayananda and Swami Dayandanda, and others. Basically, the idea is that the subtler part of the mind somehow "reflect" the universal consciousness. Swami S usually related the chidabhasa to "the awareness which we feel right now." The analogy is typically used on the single sun reflected in many pots of water. To me, this doesn't really make sense for at least a few reasons: we are using physical objects to stand in for a non-physical, non-object (a common issue); 2) it implies that our present awareness is somehow illusory; and 3) it would mean that our awareness somehow "changes" from what it presently is to something else later on. Thoughts? For some one interested but doesn't know what I am referring to, here is a fast outline. He talks about chidabhasa around the 6:25 mark.

All right, let me take a crack at this question: So this is explained in the Pancadasi, Chapter 8. Swami Paramarthananda points out that both are present at the same time. Pure consciousness is always present, but chidabhasa arises when certain parts of the mind are active. Pancadasi likens it to a mirror shining a bright spot of the sun on the wall. The sunlight is already present, and the reflected light makes an additional spot. Without the mirror (the functioning mind) there is only the sunlight. If you have multiple mirrors, you have multiple patches of bright, reflected sunlight, but between them you still have sunlight. So pure consciousness is the base, and chidabhasa is an appearance that arises due to the functioning of the mind. In other words, unchanging pure consciousness is always present and the transitory, relative awareness comes and goes. As set out by Swami Sarvapriyananda: Nirguna Brahman + maya = Saguna Brahman or Ishvara (tvam) Pure consciousness + avidya = jiva or You (tat) Tat Tvam Asi: Per Vakya Vritti, the direct meaning that you, the Jiva is Ishvara is rejected. Rather, the implied meaning refers to the essential nature of both being the same. I think neo-Advaitins focus on the transitory, relative awareness.

** Mod Note: We're not debating politics in disguise.**

** Mod Note: Post removed regarding sexual violence and victim blaming. **

Welcome!

Sri Sadhu Om, the Path of Sri Ramana

Welcome!

Mitch Horowitz also has some interesting books in this area. Thomas Cleary is underrated, IME.

I think the system is good, but I was not able to put up with the BKF persona. Basic dissolving is not that different from certain body based meditations like U Bha Khin's vipassana. I think it is really how one practices with non-intentional awareness, a relaxed sinking body, and body alignments. So for instance, I get a similar benefit from 8 Brocades and Yang Style Tai Chi, but without the drawbacks.

We have the posts.

** Mod Note: I would say that people can file a report or reach out to mods if there is an issue with another member.**

Messaging has been restored.

There are many ways to deal with anger, but the general one I'm more familiar with is to strip it of its story and feel it fully. Usually what keep anger going is engaging with it-- I can't believe he said that, who does she think she is, etc. Instead of doing that, one may just feel it as it is, without trying to modify or change it. This allows it to fully express and dissolve, i.e. to be digested into the consuming fire of awareness.

I agree with doc above. There is nothing magical about sitting cross-legged from most Buddhist POVs I have been exposed to (Theravada, Zen, and Nyingma/Kagyu). I think this bears repeating because I know many people who have wrecked their knees and back trying to pursue an ideal physical posture or avoiding the "shame" of using a chair on a retreat. As db points out, the point is to set up a relaxed stable structure so that one may meditate. Buddhism is at core a wisdom tradition (along with Advaita Vedanta), which means the fundamental problem is ignorance (avidya) so the solution is generally wisdom (jnana or prajna usually). There is also an energetic component to having a relaxed, well aligned structure, but this can be achieved sitting in a chair, kneeling position, etc. I would say the straight back and balanced head is more important than the crossed legs based on the energetic component.