The Dao Bums
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Jeff

  • Rank
    Focused on the moment

Recent Profile Visitors

12,815 profile views
  1. The difference is that there is both ways in KS. Remember that realization in KS is "conscious" where one has direct access to the Jiva going to Siva level previously discussed. Your passive thing is always ongoing, but the conscious/active is much stronger and allows a whole new set of possible practices. An example below is described by Ahbinagupta with the ritual of adoration... "This is the reason why during the rites of adoration of the circle one must remain attentive and not allow anyone to enter whose consciousness is in a dispersed state and not concentrated and absorbed, because he will be a source of contraction. In the practice of the circle one must adore all of the bodies of all those present because since they have all penetrated in the fullness of consciousness they are as if they were in our own body. If through some negligence a stranger succeeds in entering, the initiated ritual may proceed together with him provided that he does not enter in a state of contraction. Such a one, if divine grace falls upon him, will become concentrated and absorbed with the various rituals, but if he is struck by a sinister and malevolent power of the Lord, he will criticize the group." It is vastly more powerful because in passive mode, the transfer is only based upon the level/potential of the person. In what you call active mode, it is possible for the master to share directly at a higher level. Sort of like the person can draft directly at that higher level. I chose the above quote to answer your question at a more detailed level about a "level 3". It is less about the transmission, but about the acceptance and letting go in that space. But, in my terms a level 3 has not opened their heart, and so are in KS terms in a state of contraction, hence they would not be a good candidate for something like a ritual of adoration.
  2. God and stuff

    How would that work with something like Genesis when you start out presupposing a God, then say that he created heaven and earth, with the earth being void? Where is the known part orientation?
  3. I am a sorry that I used the word blob as that now seems to have become the focus rather than the actual point that I was trying to make. The difference that I am trying to describe is why I added the earlier Buddhist sutra quote. The difference is that it is all happening within yourself and not some “awareness that it is happening in”. And since it is within, one directly knows and can be active or passive. As the Shiva Sutras describe... 1.19. śaktisandhāne śarīrotpattiḥ By infusing his energy of will the embodiment of that which is willed occurs at once. 1.20. bhūtasaṁdhāna-bhūtapṛithaktva-
viśvasaṁghaṭṭāḥ By the greatness of this achievement of the energy of will the yogī can focus his awareness and heal the sick and suffering, separate elements from his body and be free from the limitations of space and time. 1.21. śuddhavidyodyāccakreśatva-siddhiḥ (When this yogī does not desire limited powers and is eager to attain the knowledge of universal being then) . . . pure knowledge rises and by that knowledge he becomes the master of the universal wheel. 1.22. mahāhṛidānusaṁdhānān mantravīryānubhavaḥ By the attentive continuity of meditation on the great ocean of consciousness the power of supreme I is attained.
  4. Agreed. Yes, understood. But those three bodies of the same Brahman is what I previous referred to as the Brahman “blob”, as there are no other lets call them “intermediate steps” that one can fully become (somewhat similar to the Daoist concept of becoming an immortal). Additionally, I believe that in AV one more realizes their component state in Brahman, then actually becoming conscious as Ishwara or Brahman.
  5. I would disagree with your above description of KS. There is only one ultimate Siva. But each being or aspect has the ability to grow/expand to become fully Siva (at a consciously aware level). In theory, to actually get truly infinite (independent) Sivas, you would have add Buddha’s concept of emptiness to KS, with its infinite Buddhas.
  6. I think we may be talking about differnent things or aspects and missing my point with your straw man comment. My point on the “blob” aspect was in relation to what I was trying to describe as the Jiva-Siva layer or phase. That is why I also included the Buddhist quote to try to help define that relative space as one of increasing perceptional differentiation. Additionally, that space includes the ongoing dissolution of subconscious attachments (like addiction to smoking), otherwise there is not the necessary clarity to have the direct conscious perception. If you sort of think of it like Shiva is the universal mind of all interconnected, then it is very much like one brings the subconscious aspects of first local mind, and then all of universal mind into conscious awareness. One becomes fully (all of) Shiva themself, not some component that dissolves into the greater whole. The fundamental difference between the two traditions is in this existence (or not) of this “higher” layer beyond the causal body. Both traditions suppose a shift from dualistic seeing, to more nondualist being, but with this additional layer, KS supposes a layer of differential nondual being.
  7. Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche

    That is very sad news. He is a very valuable light and teacher for the world. Thank you for sharing.
  8. In KS everything is an aspect of Shiva. But, to your question, Spanda would be something the motion or movement of Shiva. The major difference would be that Shiva is consciously aware of the movement, as compared to Brahman being more like an unaware blob. The consciously aware aspect is found in the extra body/layer that I earlier described as the Jiva-Siva divine phase. While this is borrowing from buddhism, I think this sutra describes the nature of the conscious realization at this layer itself. Things are both real and not real, but there is direct conscious knowing (not just a nondual cessation of knowing). Also, there is no attachment to things like smoking at this level of existence. For a KS version of this, just change bodhisattvas to sages, and Buddha to Shiva... Avatamsaka Sutra... Great bodhisattvas have no attachment to Buddha and do not develop attachments; they have no attachment to the teachings and do not develop attachments; they have no attachment to lands and do not develop attachments; they have no attachments to sentient beings and do not develop attachments. They do not see that there are sentient beings, yet they carry on educational activity, civilizing and teaching ways of liberation; they do not give up the practices of bodhisattvas with great compassion and great commitment. Seeing buddhas and hearing their teachings, they act accordingly; trusting the buddhas they plant roots of goodness, ceaselessly honoring and serving them. They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth. They carry out practices of bodhisattvas for the sole purpose of saving sentient beings and yet do not practice anything. Conforming to the essential nature of all buddhas, they develop a mind like an immense mountain. They know all falsehood and delusion, and enter the door of omniscience. Their knowledge and wisdom are broad and vast and unshakable, due to the attainment of true enlightenment. This is the insight of practical knowledge of equally saving all sentient beings in the ocean of birth and death.
  9. Really, seems pretty direct and straightforward to me. The next group down get to even have "ambitions" and they are still Jivanmuktas. Finally, the last class of sages seem to just be regular people with all of the normal issues and desires (pleasures and pains) and they are still realized as described in your text... 92-94. The last class and the least among the Sages are those whose practice and discipline are not perfect enough to destroy mental predispositions. Their minds are still active and the Sages are said to be associated with their minds. They are barely Jnanis and not Jivanmuktas as are the other two classes. They appear to share the pleasures and pains of life like any other man and will continue to do so till the end of their lives. They will be emancipated after death.
  10. Thanks, this is helpful and also highlights to me the differences with many other traditions. So in AV, the best class of sages can still have all of their normal desires and it does not in any way obstruct realization? Theoretically you could be addicted to porn and still be a fully realized Jivanmukta?
  11. Different level of sages (or effective realization) in AV? Can you share the differences or what causes the different types of realization?
  12. Yes, you have remained steadfast in that view. Thanks for the discussion.
  13. They are not separate approaches. They are all from the Shiva Sutras, but for different levels of capacity of the practioner as I described earlier.
  14. Again, that is just big difference between the views... In KS, there is no such thing as separate dreaming that one wakes up from, it is all one big conscious integration. From the Shiva Sutras... 3.20. triṣu caturthaṁ tailavadāsecyam The fourth state (turya) must be expanded like oil so that it pervades the other three: waking, dreaming and deep sleep. 2.9. jñānamannam (For such a yogī) differentiated perception is his food, or knowledge of his own nature is his food. 1.11. tritayabhoktā vīreśaḥ The one who enjoys the oneness of the three states, waking, dreaming and deep sleep in turīya becomes the master of all organic energies.
  15. Depending on one's view, these are all hugely different points. First, one has to know/decide if there really are other (separate) sentient beings. If there are not, then there is no point in ever trying to help them as it is all just a movie/dream. Second, is even if there are other sentient beings, is it possible to even help them, or is everyone just alone trapped in their own karmic path. To me, these two simple questions ultimately define the view and subsequent potential realization of the underlying tradition.