Exploring the Now

[Informer]

Anyone want to take a jab at this?

 

"Do you think one can be without suffering yet be with samsara? Instead of breaking it, only see it and utilize it?"

[xabir2005]

Anyone want to take a jab at this?

 

"Do you think one can be without suffering yet be with samsara? Instead of breaking it, only see it and utilize it?"

an arhat achieves nirvana with remainder while alive: freed from mental suffering, ignorance, afflictions, craving, anger, fear, sorrow, attachments, and so on. Yet his senses are fully functional.

 

The arhat after physical passing is "nirvana without remainder", nirvana means cessation, means ceased without remainder. While nirvana with remainder means, well, cessation of afflictions with remainder of body-mind.

 

Especially for Mahayana the goal is not just personal salvation but to be liberated and yet stay in this world to save sentient beings out of compassion.

Edited February 8, 2012 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

Vm: .as xabir has not experienced Presence,

 

 

 

This is what I disagree and you refuse to see

[Vmarco]

Thanks for the reply. I wonder if you would indulge me a bit further with your probable insight into the matter of samsara.

 

Do you think one can be without suffering yet be with samsara? Instead of breaking it, only see it and utilize it?

 

 

Yes,...although samsara continues its flow, which is change, and like a growing child, change has its pains,...there would not be suffering if one was without suffering, because of the understanding that things are as they are. In other words, Buddha implied in the first Turning of the Wheel of Dharma that suffering is a consequence of the desire for things to be other than they are. The realization of Dependant Origination, or Who's Who and When within duality, dissolves the desire for things to be other than they are.

 

Although that could appear to be a paradox, for example, the Bodhisattva vow or wish for the liberation of all sentient beings could be construed as a desire for things to be other than they are, there is difference between desire and a wish.

 

As mentioned in the top post, it is my interpretation that all four Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma point to the same thing,...uncovering the Present,...and then, sustaining it. However, although it is certain that the Present is without suffering, there may be levels within the higher alaya that are merely unaware of suffering,...like a positive, heavenly place, as pointed to in post #97 http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/22178-about-the-nature-of-non-existence/page__st__96

 

Contrary to the beliefs of other posters, I have no faith or belief in Buddhism,...I do not cling to it for some sort of identity. What Buddhism provides for me, is an inquiry, which must be realized through the imagined entity of V, but only realized when V's imagined entity is equal with "other" (as discussed in a Way of the Bodhisattva quote within this thread (post #12).

 

"all matter is frozen or slowed down light" David Bohm

[Informer]

an arhat achieves nirvana with remainder while alive: freed from mental suffering, ignorance, afflictions, craving, anger, fear, sorrow, attachments, and so on. Yet his senses are fully functional.

 

The arhat after physical passing is "nirvana without remainder", nirvana means cessation, means ceased without remainder. While nirvana with remainder means, well, cessation of afflictions with remainder of body-mind.

 

Especially for Mahayana the goal is not just personal salvation but to be liberated and yet stay in this world to save sentient beings out of compassion.

 

The question is in regards to samsara, I don't see that you answered it? Nirvana is breaking Samsara right?

[Vmarco]

Vm: .as xabir has not experienced Presence,

 

 

This is what I disagree and you refuse to see

 

That your opinion,...my opinion is that there is no Seven Stages of I Am or whatever in the Present.

 

IMO, There are no beliefs, no faith, no Brahman, no god in the Present.

 

IMO, There are no Advaitans, Buddhists, Taoists, in the Present.

 

How's that? I read your posts in this thread and saw no indication of your understanding of the Present,...thus, you are either keeping any direct understanding of the Present to yourself, or you have not experienced flashing out of alaya. As it is unlikely that someone who has flashed would keep it a secret on a forum like this, the latter is the most likely.

 

"A wise man, recognizing that the world is but an illusion, does not act as if it is real"...Buddha

[xabir2005]

The question is in regards to samsara, I don't see that you answered it? Nirvana is breaking Samsara right?

It is the end of samsara (the world of suffering and delusion), but it does not mean a denial, rejection, or disssociation of the world.

 

Here Zen teacher and academic David Loy may clarify:

 

http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/david.htm

 

That saṁsāra is nirvāṇa is a major tenet of Mahāyāna philosophy. "Nothing of saṁsāra is different from nirvāṇa, nothing of nirvāṇa is different from saṁsāra. That which is the limit of nirvāṇa is also the limit of saṁsāra; there is not the slightest difference between the two." [1] And yet there must be some difference between them, for otherwise no distinction would have been made and there would be no need for two words to describe the same state. So Nāgārjuna also distinguishes them: "That which, taken as causal or dependent, is the process of being born and passing on, is, taken noncausally and beyond all dependence, declared to be nirvāṇa." [2] There is only one reality -- this world, right here -- but this world may be experienced in two different ways. Saṁsāra is the "relative" world as usually experienced, in which "I" dualistically perceive "it" as a collection of objects which interact causally in space and time. Nirvāṇa is the world as it is in itself, nondualistic in that it incorporates both subject and object into a whole which, Mādhyamika insists, cannot be characterized (Chandrakīrti: "Nirvāṇa or Reality is that which is absolved of all thought-construction"), but which Yogācāra nevertheless sometimes calls "Mind" or "Buddhanature," and so forth.

 

But if, as Buddhism claims, there never was an "I, " how can "I" experience dualistically? The answer, of course, is that "I" do not experience dualistically; the sense of duality is only an illusion, since all experience is and always was nondual.

[Informer]

I think I get it. Samsara is the current on the surface, and the deeper current below the surface is nirvana?

 

So what is it all to do with suffering within samsara? Must one achieve the depths to end suffering?

 

If you seem to be suffering Xabir, is it because of samsara?

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[xabir2005]

That your opinion,...my opinion is that there is no Seven Stages of I Am or whatever in the Present.

 

IMO, There are no beliefs, no faith, no Brahman, no god in the Present.

 

IMO, There are no Advaitans, Buddhists, Taoists, in the Present.

 

How's that? I read your posts in this thread and saw no indication of your understanding of the Present,...thus, you are either keeping any direct understanding of the Present to yourself, or you have not experienced flashing out of alaya. As it is unlikely that someone who has flashed would keep it a secret on a forum like this, the latter is the most likely.

 

"A wise man, recognizing that the world is but an illusion, does not act as if it is real"...Buddha

Of course there is no "belief, faith, etc" in I AM. I already said it is **nonconceptual** Presence-existence-consciousness, just an undeniable timeless beingness/presence/consciousness however you want to describe it. And when I said "non-conceptual" I mean it literally. There is just this undivided, non-conceptual, direct, immediate pure-presence-existence that is shining vividly and undeniably.

 

And although it seems like final realization, since it is complete in itself, it is not. Because non conceptuality is not enough to remove subtle *latent* ingrained views and framework and this, you do not see. It will only become apparent when further insights unfold.

Edited February 8, 2012 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

I think I get it. Samsara is the current on the surface, and the deeper current below the surface is nirvana?

 

So what is it all to do with suffering within samsara? Must one achieve the depths to end suffering?

 

If you seem to be suffering Xabir, is it because of samsara?

Not exactly. There is ultimately no samsara and no nirvana, it is only spoken of conventionally. Samsara and nirvana is also empty of true existence.

 

When suffering (samsara) is conventionally spoken, nirvana (the end of suffering) is conventionally spoken. But if there is ultimately no suffering (suffering being dream-like, illusory, dependently arisen appearance without substance), then there is also no real cessation (nirvana) of suffering. Therefore samsara and nirvana is also relative truths.

 

Relatively speaking. Since suffering dependently originates from the twelve chains of causation starting with ignorance, the arising of deep wisdom will cut off the chains of ignorance, I and mine making, karma making, clinging and attachment. Since there is no more conditions (e.g. Ignorance) for suffering and afflictions, they stop arising. Since rebirth depends on karma, which depends on ignorance, one who has ended ignorance also no longer makes the conditions for further births in samsara.

 

Samsara is just a label for the human condition under the chain of suffering and ignorance. If you break ignorance, that can no longer be called "samsara". "Samsara" is not a place or even a thing, it is simple the state or condition of someone who is deluded and suffering, and that designation no longer applies for one who is awakened and liberated.

[Z3N]

Vmarco! with a clear and concise mind brings a smile upon my face. Thank you.

[Informer]

Since no caught this I will point it out to you Vmarco, you said :

 

"Descartes' observations only included the fives senses of sight, hearing, touch, feeling, and taste; "

 

Feeling is not included in the 5 senses, you left out smell.

 

There is not much of a way for feeling to deceive you, either it is felt or not?

 

People are deceived by their definition of what they think is love, not by love itself. They attache things to it, which causes them harm later. Like piling a bunch of stuff on a table, then the tables vanishes, what happens to the stuff?

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[Z3N]

The past, present and future is all happening in the now!! As soon as you measure it, objectively or subjectively than all is lost. My master would say "the mind murders the one giving rise to the many" This murdering of the present is all in the work of "brain matter" selfishly claiming it's "sensory data" as the source of all that there is. This is of course is the illusionary consciousness in the organism.

 

We must learn not to get complicated in the whole conpectual disputes that arise between different realms. Begin to see the golden rule that flows in all the cultural arts of spirituality and their teachings. With this in mind we can network a concise understanding on a global scale transending into the realms of universality.

[Z3N]

Since no caught this I will point it out to you Vmarco, you said :

 

"Descartes' observations only included the fives senses of sight, hearing, touch, feeling, and taste; "

 

Feeling is not included in the 5 senses, you left out smell.

 

There is not much of a way for feeling to deceive you, either it is felt or not?

 

People are deceived by their definition of what they think is love, not by love itself. They attache things to it, which causes them harm later. Like piling a bunch of stuff on a table, then the tables vanishes, what happens to the stuff?

 

Emotions are the aquired accumulation of all sense information that is expericed by the organism. You feel love because it is a primal desire, same with anger, fear and so forth. Emotions are apart of our survival just like any other sense that has evolved in the organism.

 

The things fall of the table just hitting the ground in organized chaos as they do because it is physics. Same goes the emotions when love doesn't go as one wishes, hopes and dreams. They too smash onto the floor as you try and pick up the pices. This too is all apart of the illiusionary consciousness of self.

 

The point is we are only functioning on less than 10% of our brain. This is the hurdle that we are facIng as a species on this planet. It is a importance that we begin to understand our senses and how it translates from the brain, then the mind and into the quantum of consciousness transcending the realms of energy and matter. The ancients hold the key from the past, the quantum physicist hold the key of the future, and we as a consciousness hold the key to the present. When this information merges into one then truely human consciousness will evolve and awareness will be awakened.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Z3N

[Aaron]

Actually, the politeness you demand from others would be better served if you read the previous posts before attacking. For example, post #19 says:

 

 

 

Thus, it was already mentioned that neither had the background to convince the other.

 

As for the importance of this topic,...what could be more important? This is the most important topic anyone can engage in. Of course for those like yourself, who give only a cursory glance at posts, sifting out a way to disagree, than yes,...you will get nothing from this most important topic.

 

For someone to suggest this topic is unimportant, they must believe the perceived now is the only now,...and all they need to understand.

 

For those committed to the inquiry of waking up however, they most certainly want to know as soon as possible if something they think is meaningful, may in fact be meaningless. Such a person is dedicated to the Direct or Short Path, and uncovering the absolute Present in this lifetime.

 

"Relative and absolute,

These the two truths are declared to be.

The absolute is not within the reach of intellect,

For the intellect is grounded in the relative."

Shantideva 9.2

 

This topic is no more important than a bowl of pudding. Importance is something you attribute to it, not something it naturally possesses. So, if I'm hungry, then the bowl of pudding looks very important indeed, because it satisfies that hunger, however if I've eaten my fill, then I don't see much use for the bowl of pudding, at least not right now, so it doesn't seem very important at all.

 

You seem to waver between three topics, the evil of any religion other than Buddhism, the undivided light that you believe constitutes everything in existence, and the lack of a present time. Now I'm not knocking you for that, those obviously seem very important to you, I'm just asking the question, are they really important or are you attributing an importance that doesn't really exist? If the former, then why? If the latter, then why bother talking about it anymore.

 

In the old days, from what I understood, Buddhist didn't actively preach, they only taught people that came to them. It seems that many Buddhists in the Western world feel this need to proselytize in the Christian sense, rather than just let it be. Is it any wonder why many in the East look at Western Buddhists with this sort of amusement, like they were watching young children play a game of tag? Tag, you're not enlightened. No, Tag, you're not enlightened. Oh yay, we're all enlightened. Wait that isn't any fun, we're all enlightened except for Xabir, he's it.

 

You guys do more harm to Buddhism than good, but you obviously fail to recognize that, or maybe you just don't care. As for me, that's fine, anything that keeps people from being sucked into a religion's ideology is a good thing. Hopefully your arguments will inspire people to see Buddhism for what it is, another belief system. Hopefully they wont get involved in it or they'll drop it and then begin to seek real awareness through their own experience.

 

Aaron

[Informer]

Time is the delay of everything catching up to you. Or you catching up to it, depending.

[Z3N]

This topic is no more important than a bowl of pudding. Importance is something you attribute to it, not something it naturally possesses. So, if I'm hungry, then the bowl of pudding looks very important indeed, because it satisfies that hunger, however if I've eaten my fill, then I don't see much use for the bowl of pudding, at least not right now, so it doesn't seem very important at all.

 

You seem to waver between three topics, the evil of any religion other than Buddhism, the undivided light that you believe constitutes everything in existence, and the lack of a present time. Now I'm not knocking you for that, those obviously seem very important to you, I'm just asking the question, are they really important or are you attributing an importance that doesn't really exist? If the former, then why? If the latter, then why bother talking about it anymore.

 

In the old days, from what I understood, Buddhist didn't actively preach, they only taught people that came to them. It seems that many Buddhists in the Western world feel this need to proselytize in the Christian sense, rather than just let it be. Is it any wonder why many in the East look at Western Buddhists with this sort of amusement, like they were watching young children play a game of tag? Tag, you're not enlightened. No, Tag, you're not enlightened. Oh yay, we're all enlightened. Wait that isn't any fun, we're all enlightened except for Xabir, he's it.

 

You guys do more harm to Buddhism than good, but you obviously fail to recognize that, or maybe you just don't care. As for me, that's fine, anything that keeps people from being sucked into a religion's ideology is a good thing. Hopefully your arguments will inspire people to see Buddhism for what it is, another belief system. Hopefully they wont get involved in it or they'll drop it and then begin to seek real awareness through their own experience.

 

Aaron

 

Now this has put a smile on my face! Fantastic!!

[Vmarco]

The past, present and future is all happening in the now!! As soon as you measure it, objectively or subjectively than all is lost. My master would say "the mind murders the one giving rise to the many" This murdering of the present is all in the work of "brain matter" selfishly claiming it's "sensory data" as the source of all that there is. This is of course is the illusionary consciousness in the organism.

 

We must learn not to get complicated in the whole conpectual disputes that arise between different realms. Begin to see the golden rule that flows in all the cultural arts of spirituality and their teachings. With this in mind we can network a concise understanding on a global scale transending into the realms of universality.

 

Part 1,...we should be clear and concise,...The past, present and future is NOT all happening in the now!

 

The past, perceived present and future is all happening upon the Now! There is no Now in time, space, energy, mass, self, other, belief, or any phenomena. The Now is simply a causeless fulcrum upon which duality effects its motion, brought about by the delusion it is separate from the Now, and seeking to return to the Now, which it can never do, because the separation never occurred.

 

Part 2,...yes, a concise language that reflects Heart Mind needs to develop, otherwise the consciouslessness of the delusion continues.

 

V

[Vmarco]

Since no caught this I will point it out to you Vmarco, you said :

 

"Descartes' observations only included the fives senses of sight, hearing, touch, feeling, and taste; "

 

Feeling is not included in the 5 senses, you left out smell.

 

There is not much of a way for feeling to deceive you, either it is felt or not?

 

People are deceived by their definition of what they think is love, not by love itself. They attache things to it, which causes them harm later. Like piling a bunch of stuff on a table, then the tables vanishes, what happens to the stuff?

 

Yes,...thanks for catching that. Smell is very important. Interestingly, there is even a new security device for detecting ones "smell", supposedly as individual as a finger print.

 

Feeling, IMO can be quite deceptive however, if it is filtered through a predisposition such as an emotional core issue. As you said, depends if things are attached to it.

 

I heard a very interesting statement that is applicable here:

 

EJ Gold said, "Real emotions are communicated by outward radiation of the mood, and originate through an awakened emotional center, which has no reverberational effects in other parts of the body, and is not necessary to verbally communicate the emotion.

Positive and negative emotion are subjective mental states occuring in reflex, and must be verbalized and elaborately described, explained, rationalized and mentally communicated and understood.

Those who can produce real emotions in themselves never communicate about emotional states in mental language; they just radiate the emotions, allowing the emotion to speak for itself.

 

In the presence of someone who is able to produce real emotion, we experience feelings - perhaps for the first time. Very often, someone who has awakened the higher Emotional Body and who has learned to radiate emotions becomes a celebrity-guru, and people gather like cattle to bathe in the higher emotions. These higher emotions are often mistaken for some mysterious cosmic force or interpreted in some pseudo-religious way, but really they are just emotions.

What a pity that human beings are so unaccustomed to emotion that they feel compelled to submissively huddle together in the warmth of the emotional radiation of someone just as mechanical as they are, but who happened to have activated, by accident, the higher Emotional Body." '

[Informer]

Yes,...thanks for catching that. Smell is very important. Interestingly, there is even a new security device for detecting ones "smell", supposedly as individual as a finger print.

 

Feeling, IMO can be quite deceptive however, if it is filtered through a predisposition such as an emotional core issue. As you said, depends if things are attached to it.

 

I heard a very interesting statement that is applicable here:

 

EJ Gold said, "Real emotions are communicated by outward radiation of the mood, and originate through an awakened emotional center, which has no reverberational effects in other parts of the body, and is not necessary to verbally communicate the emotion.

Positive and negative emotion are subjective mental states occuring in reflex, and must be verbalized and elaborately described, explained, rationalized and mentally communicated and understood.

Those who can produce real emotions in themselves never communicate about emotional states in mental language; they just radiate the emotions, allowing the emotion to speak for itself.

 

In the presence of someone who is able to produce real emotion, we experience feelings - perhaps for the first time. Very often, someone who has awakened the higher Emotional Body and who has learned to radiate emotions becomes a celebrity-guru, and people gather like cattle to bathe in the higher emotions. These higher emotions are often mistaken for some mysterious cosmic force or interpreted in some pseudo-religious way, but really they are just emotions.

What a pity that human beings are so unaccustomed to emotion that they feel compelled to submissively huddle together in the warmth of the emotional radiation of someone just as mechanical as they are, but who happened to have activated, by accident, the higher Emotional Body." '

 

I agree with you that feeling can be misconstrued, however the deception is not within the feeling. Relinquishing self relinquishes the deception of feelings, ime. I don't even remember the last time I felt a negative emotion. Oh yes, it was in failure to show my brother the light. Then it wasn't really negative per-say, it was like a skip in the beat of metta.

 

No anger, fear, sadness, regret, or anything like that for quite a while. The negative emotions are from attaching strings to the positive ones. Selflessness reveals that, thus freeing the emotions to be experienced without repercussions and systematically denying the ownerships. Instead of having or owning love, love becomes a place to go. The self inherently owns the emotions, that is a given string, the rest depends on what else you attached.

 

Pride, Tradition, Lineage, Religion, Culture, all of these are prominent attachments.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[Informer]

It was pretty good other than this "Those who can produce real emotions in themselves never communicate about emotional states in mental language;" (imo) Never has yet to be proven, neither has forever.

[Vmarco]

This topic is no more important than a bowl of pudding.

 

You seem to waver between three topics, the evil of any religion other than Buddhism, the undivided light that you believe constitutes everything in existence, and the lack of a present time. Now I'm not knocking you for that, those obviously seem very important to you, I'm just asking the question, are they really important or are you attributing an importance that doesn't really exist? If the former, then why? If the latter, then why bother talking about it anymore.

 

 

The above are words of a fragmented sentient being,...nevertheless, just because you do not see stars in your daytime, doesn't mean they're not there.

 

In other words, your return to Source is the most important thing in your life, except that you are so distracted, diverted, and dis-integrated that you do not recognize it. The return to Source is presence in the Presence of the Present. Just because very few realize this during their perceived lifetime, does not mean it is not the most important thing.

 

The relative fact that you are a member of TTB suggests that some aspect of your aggregated self is dissatisfied with your fragmentation. But as T. S. Eliot said, "Human kind cannot bear very much reality."

 

To summarize,...your fragmented reality, conjured from sentient beingness, which, depending on the diversions, can not achieve more than being always almost satisfied, may at some point wonder if there is anything more. Some realize that this more cannot be found in the past or anticipation of a future; an inquiry that may lead them to the greatest adventure of all, the Present.

 

Look at a star,...we should know that not only is the light we are viewing in the past, but that because of the curvature of spectral light, it isn't even where we are looking. Relatively speaking, that is no different than the light of the monitor in front of you,...it is in the past. You cannot observe an object in the Present,...what you are viewing is merely a perceived now.

 

The 6 Senses CANNOT detect the Present,...the 6 Senses only observe motion,...motion is within time,....there is no Present in time.

 

It doesn't matter what you believe, or believe that perceived others believe,...the 6 Senses are not viewing the World that surrounds them, but only the World that surrounded them. The 6 Senses can only observe the past,...albeit a fraction of so-called time in the past,...it is not the Present.

 

V

[Informer]

They think they are special, that's the beef. You must humble them to get through, which is difficult within the object of that assumption. Most do not take humbling lightly, and will vehemently deny it until venom is exhausted.

 

I enjoy being humbled, although it is not a trait I hold on too anymore than any other. I am under the impression that if one is worthy of my humility then he can surely humble me. If one demands my respect, he will likely get non, if one takes on the role of teacher, and I as student in any form of communication, then I will try my best to offer respect. After all, it is he who is giving to me, and I am appreciative of that. I refuse to pretend respect and humility, there is enough pretending already in the world.

 

Respect and humility are sometimes demanded, but falsely so. Humility and respect is something that is given.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer

[Jetsun]

I agree with you that feeling can be misconstrued, however the deception is not within the feeling. Relinquishing self relinquishes the deception of feelings, ime. I don't even remember the last time I felt a negative emotion. Oh yes, it was in failure to show my brother the light. Then it wasn't really negative per-say, it was like a skip in the beat of metta.

 

No anger, fear, sadness, regret, or anything like that for quite a while. The negative emotions are from attaching strings to the positive ones. Selflessness reveals that, thus freeing the emotions to be experienced without repercussions and systematically denying the ownerships. Instead of having or owning love, love becomes a place to go. The self inherently owns the emotions, that is a given string, the rest depends on what else you attached.

 

Pride, Tradition, Lineage, Religion, Culture, all of these are prominent attachments.

 

Not feeling things like sadness and negative emotion sounds like some sort of problem rather than spiritual evolution to me.

[Informer]

Not feeling things like sadness and negative emotion sounds like some sort of problem rather than spiritual evolution to me.

 

It's called emptiness, non has affect or effect on what you feel. What is felt becomes a choice, instead of autonomous.

It's really not that hard, you can reflex emotions or not, it really is up to you.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Informer