forestofclarity

It is helpful to others-- many of whom may be reading anonymously!

Because I don't understand it.

I've never heard a teacher give such teachings without some sort of context. Buddhism isn't a series of stand-alone axioms, it is a whole tradition, usually transmitted from a living teacher to a student.

Do you think that truly happy beings would commit evil acts?

Welcome!

Some also say this guy knows a thing or two (Pa Auk Sayadaw). Different end of the spectrum (an end that includes Patanjali, FWIW).

This part is absolutely correct IMO.

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."

- Khenchen Thrangu, Vivid Awareness p.77 (emphasis added)

Yoga Vasistha Book Three, Chapter 5, trans. Swami Jyotirmayananda states: And in 3:10: Which sounds like: Self Liberation Through Seeing with Naked Awareness, trans John Myrdhin Reynolds How can this be? Ramana Maharshi, Talk 445: As the Swamis sometimes say, "True philosophers never agree, true sages never disagree."

Welcome!

Welcome!

Welcome!

Welcome!

Mod Note: Locking since the various personsae associated with this thread have been banned. If some one wishes to start a new thread, feel free.

Welcome!

-- Fr Martin Laird, OSA, Into the Silent Land

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

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.