Awareness of Non-Meditation

[Lucky7Strikes]

What I have uncovered for myself is an honest understanding (that is, not a belief) of what will never leave me, and from which I can never leave. If I got hit by a car tomorrow, I (not meaning the ego I, but the noumenal self) is clear enough from delusion to be in light without difficulty,...nevertheless, I have not ceased disrobing falsities, and am of the opinion, that when enough falsities are realized, that perhaps the bindings of the body can be surpassed,...if they cannot be, than I would say that all Buddhism is false.

Everything below this paragraph is babble. Who cares about Absolute Bodhicitta. That's just a term and an idea you have. Throw that away and let's have a discussion of what you wrote here, because it's more direct than anything you've written so far.

 

What will never leave you? How did you come upon a direct experiencing of "this" that will never leave you and from which you can never leave? More importantly, what demarcates "this" and "you"?

 

Have you been conscious and freely capable of existing outside of the functions of the physical body? If not you don't actually know that if you were to be physically damaged severely, that you can be "clear enough from delusion." Why? Well because you haven't had precedent of existing with clarity outside the body.

 

Are you conscious 24/7, as in through sleep and deep sleep states? If not, it also shows you don't have mastery over the necessities of the body and you "clarity" is affected daily when you doze off.

[Lucky7Strikes]

I don't know about transcending life or death. Enlightenment is a poor word because it has too many definitions for different people. Undoubtedly mine would be on the low end on the list. IMO Being a complete human being doesn't give you powers, or immortality, it means that you're Awake. A seemingly fragile state shattered by thought; and our minds are a thunderstorm of thought, only the loudest of which we are aware. With 'I' thoughts being the loudest.

 

But there is a part of us that is Awake, but its a small part and we're not in tuned with it. Some where in our most quiet mind it lurks. Dancing between thoughts, popping up between breaths. Our job is to identify it, find it, lure it out. Stay with it. Stay with that bright awareness night and day, conscious and asleep. Cling to it as if it were our last breath.

 

Maybe that's why some Indian mystics have a practice of pointing straight up with there hand years and decades at time. The pointing is an intimate symbol to remember remember, keep the awareness just so. That seems a bit extreme and you give up any semblance of normal life.

 

I think there's a middle ground we have to find.

We all want different things out of life. So people want different outcomes in their spiritual journey.

 

My current goal is pretty straight forward. It's to transcend old age and death whether that is via energetically, through awareness, physical alchemy, or other means so that I don't become entrapped by the oncoming physical conditions without any idea of where I'm headed or no sense of freedom when everything begins to deteriorate.

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

I remembered the thread on Dharmawheel titled 'Turiya vs. Dzogchen' My link

mr.marigpa [i think this sn is pretty funny, lol]

Turiya or Turya: The fourth state of consciousness beyond the states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep and stringing together all the states; the Metaphysical Consciousness distinct from the psychological or empirical self; the Saksi or witnessing consciousness; the transcendental Self.
"The fourth (i.e. Turiya) is NOT a state. It is the background on which dream and wake arises and disappears. Turiya is just another term to describe pure awareness. It is also called the Nirvikalpa." From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turiya

1. How does Dzoghcen account for Turiya?

2. How is Turiya different from Dharmakaya and Rigpa?

3. If a practitioner manages to sleep in Turiya, how is this different from clear light sleep in Dzogchen?

Malcolm [formerly Namdrol:]

mr.marigpa wrote:
1. How does Dzoghcen account for Turiya?

Turiya is equivalent to the ālaya, a state of ignorance.

2. How is Turiya different from Dharmakaya and Rigpa?

The ālaya is not the dharmakāya: the nature of dharmakāya is rigpa, the nature of the ālaya is marigpa.

3. If a practitioner manages to sleep in Turiya, how is this different from clear light sleep in Dzogchen?

The former is resting the ālaya; the latter in dharmakāya.

4. There are Transcendental Meditation practitioners who claim to be aware in dreamless sleep....is this not a case of sleeping in the clear light?

No.

mr.marigpa wrote:How is the alaya described in Dzogchen teachings?

The all basis is described in various ways, but fundamentally it is consciousness.


Isn't emptiness the nature of the dharmakaya?


Yes, that too.

If we are not resting in rigpa, then are we resting in the alaya?


Yes.


Some TM practitioners claim a stable witnessing in waking, dream, and dreamless sleep. According to Dzogchen, is this just good mindfulness?
How is this witnessing capacity (that includes ability to not be distracted by daytime activity and dreams) different from rigpa?

If there is a subject and object, it is mind, not rigpa.

N

asunthatneversets: The state or position of being firmly established in "the witness" is merely being stabilized in the ālaya(kun gzhi). The term "witnessing" in and of itself suggests observing phenomena from a particular standpoint. Stable witnessing is a state of detachment, In being firmly established in the "witness" phenomena appear as they normally do except there's no feeling of it being "me" or "I". The "me"(or 'that' which witnesses) is posited to be something other. So in witnessing, the body and other phenomena appear detached from the "knower". And 'that'(pure knowingness) which is disconnected is then posited to be beyond anything "knowable" because it is that which knows. 'That' which knows(pure knowingness/awareness) is considered to be a substantiated and localized substratum(even though it is considered to be formless) and for that reason it is the ālaya. To describe this state, an analogy of a movie patron viewing images on a theater screen is sometimes used.

The witnessing state is equivalent to stabilized śamatha (shiné), once śamatha is stabilized one is essentially proficient in "really good dualistic mindfulness" (as you said). After stabilized shiné, next step is released shiné and once released shiné is achieved and stabilized, one is said to be officially practicing dzogchen.

"When you have achieved released shiné and remain in the continuation of this state, you have finally become a dzogchen practitioner."
- Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

Malcolm: The dharmakāya is endowed with light in conformity with it’s essence, emptiness and it’s nature, clarity.

mzaur: I think it would be very useful if you defined emptiness.... I take you do not mean a thought-free state of mind as emptiness is sometimes used.

Malcolm: Here emptiness refers to freedom from extremes.

asunthatneversets wrote: Rigpa(vidyā) is of a different flavor, in rigpa the localized substratum(or abiding background) is empty and for this reason it(rigpa) is primordially unstained by any distinctive notions or characteristics. Though rigpa(vidyā) can't be accurately described (for purposes of allowing one to get an idea of it's nature) it is sometimes said to be akin to space itself.

mzaur wrote: Abiding background is pure awareness separate from phenomena, right? Brahman or Self. Could you clarify what the bold means? Advaita defines Brahman as empty of attributes, but I surmise you are using empty in a different way.

I think I know what you mean. It's just that I bet some people read these forums and think empty means something different, like how Advaita uses it.

asunthatneversets: The abiding background can either be (i)awareness separate from phenomena or (ii)awareness merged with phenomena. In either case there is the faculty of awareness which is assumed to be existent. Advaita defines Brahman as being empty of attributes because it is 'that' which knows(the knower). The "knower" is attributeless because through investigation it is unaccounted for in anything perceivable or knowable. In advaita the term neti-neti is implemented (to discover this faculty) which means "not this, not that". So using this negative approach one disavows every conceivable aspect of one's experience until the "knower"(awareness) itself is all that remains. The process is much like; "I am not the body, because I am aware of the body - I am not my thoughts, because I am aware of my thoughts, etc...", so the process retracts into the realm of the formless observer. Since this formless awareness is posited to be unstained by any phenomenal appearance (or designation), it is said to be empty of attributes, unassailable and eternal. Awareness (then still assumed to be embodied) is the ātman, and upon actualizing the differentiation between the ātman and characteristics which allegedly compose the personal self(jīvātman), and external world, the next step is to merge the ātman with the brahman(universal self).

anjali wrote: How is this essentially different than thought-free wakefulness as discussed by Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche?

Paul wrote: The state of rigpa is the recognition of the empty essence, the natural cognisance, and the union of these - the compassionate energy; the total transparency.

Resting in a refined state of awareness, as in the first description, is not the same as it does not have the empty nature. It is not completely open. In fact it blocks thoughts and other kinds of experience. It's frozen. This is the defining aspect of the alaya vijnana. Also, the awareness is thought to be something real and ultimate.

The notion of 'thought free' in Dzogchen is something that needs to be understood clearly. There can be mental events in rigpa. There are thoughts, but there is no grasping at them at all. They self liberate. Normal, dualistic thoughts are termed namtok, and in rigpa they are absent by definition. Ungrasped, self liberating mental events are nangwa. Nangwa are allowed by rigpa's openness. But they don't become concepts.

You can see that the description of turya states that thoughts are not present, and a state of stillness is the aim. It's also somewhat dull and frozen. Also, there is some effort needed. Rigpa is not still or moving - it's also totally open and unfrozen. And it's not reached by effort.

asunthatneversets wrote: Yeah the mirror can be mistaken as representing an abiding background which has the capacity to reflect. But that is only if one focuses on the mirror as an object beholding reflections (which I'm sure is a common error but isn't what Rinpoche was suggesting). It's important to carefully investigate how the analogy is presented... it's not the mind is like the mirror, but the nature of mind is like the nature of the mirror, in that, the void nature of mind is empty yet luminous. So the essential quality (or nature) of the mirror is that it reflects, but is that essential quality or characteristic a tangible thing or suchness? Can you roll or bounce the mirror's capacity to reflect? Is that essence or capacity located anywhere? Is it blue or green? Or any color or shape? No, it isn't, it cannot be identified as 'this or that' yet it is known clear as day. And much like the mirror this innate, empty, luminous, natural essence and capacity of mind, reflects yet does not hold and remains unscathed. The reflections are not inherently part of the mirror's nature, but are product of it and inseparable from it... and "it"(the nature) is an indistinguishable quality which cannot be pigeonholed.

mazaur wrote: Thanks for your response.

Would it be accurate then to say that there is no mirror apart from the arising reflections, that indeed there actually is no mirror at all, only reflections?

asunthatneversets wrote: "All that arises is essentially no more real than a reflection, transparently pure and clear, beyond all definition or logical explanation. Yet the seeds of past action, karma, continue to cause further arising. Even so-know all that exists is ultimately void of self-nature utterly non-dual!"
- Nirmānakāya Buddha

"All dharmas are like reflected images,
clear and pure
without turbulence,
ungraspable, inexpressible,
truly arisen from cause and from action."
- (Different translation of the above quote)

(And when I say indistinguishable quality I don't mean to imply that it's a qualitative suchness or that the quality belongs to an implied connotative suchness, it's not established or unestablished in any way... being primordially unborn it evades even itself).

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[konchog uma]

thanks simple jack, that was a nice post

 

in resting the mind without fabrication it seems like a clarity arises that lies behind or beneath the awareness of thoughts, bliss, or other mental activity. is this correct that the mind of clear light can be present with any state of consciousness, or that in converse, one could experience a state of bliss without that clear mind? just wanting to make sure i understand what Tsele Natsok Rangdrol is saying about mahamudra.

 

i have been inspired lately to engage the more formless teachings and practices, namely dzogchen and mahamudra. there is a local dzogchen group that sits at one of the meditation halls i sit at, but they are for some reason not there when their website says they will be. is it something that i can learn from books? if so, do you recommend any books to begin with?

 

thanks again

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[konchog uma]

Seriously, find a teacher to help you with this stuff.

 

i will ask my lama.

 

i appreciate you taking the time to try to field those questions. i had never really thought about it like that before. thank you for the book recommendation too. i find that reading helps, even when you're learning from a teacher and from experience.

 

thanks!

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Seth Ananda]

In his restricted books, ChNNR dealt at length with methods to get into stable shine/shamatha first, then progressing into released shine and rigpa. Certainly he does not consider 'stable shine' as a waste of time, but an important stepping stone.

 

The method to gain shamatha in Dzogchen is the visualization and focusing on the white A.

Sure, I have read many of them, and to me meditation is crucial, but I also believe there is a point where one must pass it.

I am not there yet, so still use the white A semdzin regularly...

And I did not say he said stable shine was a waste of time, but he certainly chastised his students that he felt were becoming meditation addicts, as cultivating samahdi and not Rigpa, and being confused about their actual attainments.

I think he was warning about getting stuck in the alaya...

[Seth Ananda]

[Informer]

Vmarco, all the writers of enlightenment you admire are but a crutch. They don't lead to enlightenment, they only try to describe it, or persuade others of their enlightenment in many cases.

 

The one truth I found in the thread was that hope is pointless, as it is another form of belief and wanting. That's not to say it doesn't have any pragmatic value. I'm not even really interested much in what you type, because you distort things to suite your own purpose, without regard to the context of what was being said by the philosophers. I would suggest you study some philosophy to aid your writing especially when you are commonly presenting obvious fallacious arguments.

 

Get your shit together Vmarco, you seem to be losing it.

 

Women are no more or less then men, regardless of the previous determination and misconceptions present in the past, that was due to tradition of the time. Tradition is bad because it allows wrongness to be perpetuated.(imo) When we discover things that are wrong, we fix it. Which is why you shouldn't take everything you read literally, or your gonna be a fundamentalist with (wrong view). IE; Women and Men is a division as we all are human more than we are a man or woman.

 

All humans are fallible.

 

I would suggest if you want to do something productive, attempt to do MCO, then these "profound insights" you think you have, will not be so profound to you, because there are many way beyond your intellectual masturbating, which is a dead end, more so than meditation.

 

If you can do one complete MCO you will know what use is meditation and what it leads to, experientially. Then when you achieve that new perspective, you can go back and read some of the stupid shit you wrote, and it will be apparent, imo.

Edited May 21, 2012 by Informer

[Informer]

Hi rainbowvein!

 

 

 

All humans are fallible.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2012 by Informer

[Informer]

Do you find there is not will involved rainbowvein?

[Clarity]

[Jetsun]

Do you find there is not will involved rainbowvein?

 

"The Tao is natural. All forced manipulations and concoctions are in vain. Some people guard their minds and settle their ideas and thoughts, some people hold their breath and keep it in the abdomen, some people perform psychosomatic energy-circulation exercises. When these people come to the end of their lives and find everything they did was useless, they will resent the gods, also uselessly."

- Liu I-Ming 'Awakening to the Tao'

[Informer]

Then how does awareness move from form to formless?

 

I never did understand that part of Taoism. Is it not choice that guides one along the path? There is will behind any intent, any choice. (imo)

[Informer]

IE: You are likely confusing WILL with willpower?

[Informer]

I think that Will is choosing what will be, willpower is power of ego or power over others. (in that context)

 

The Daodejing, often called simply the Laozi after its reputed author, describes the Dao (or Tao) as the mystical source and ideal of all existence: it is unseen, but not transcendent, immensely powerful yet supremely humble, being the root of all things. According to the Daodejing, humans have no special place within the Dao, being just one of its many ("ten thousand") manifestations. People have desires and free will (and thus are able to alter their own nature). Many act "unnaturally", upsetting the natural balance of the Dao. The Daodejing intends to lead students to a "return" to their natural state, in harmony with Dao.

 

http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Lao_Tzu

 

People have desires and free will (and thus are able to alter their own nature). Many act “unnaturally”, upsetting the natural balance of the Dao. The Daodejing intends to lead students to a “return” to their natural state, in harmony with Dao.

 

http://www.embellishedminds.com/3230/lao-tzu/

 

“Knowing others is wisdom;

Knowing the self is enlightenment.

Mastering others requires force;

Mastering the self requires strength;

He who knows he has enough is rich.

Perseverance is a sign of will power.”

― Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

 

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/show/258643

 

Well I can't seem to find the Lao Tzu quotes you are referring too . . . Maybe you can post it?

Edited May 21, 2012 by Informer

[Informer]

Will is what you choose for yourself where as will power is choosing for another as it appears in some contexts, and in others will power is just will. I don't see where Lao Tzu used will power as anything other than will?

 

I think that would be an important point to find error in translation that could lead to misconception.

Edited May 21, 2012 by Informer

[Clarity]

 

I will offer you this,...you will NEVER understand Who you are, without understanding When you are. And if you did understand When you are (not the you that you think you are, but the you that you are) there would be no going around energetically correcting others experiences of having 'no hope.

 

V

 

When is not a question of time, it is a question of Presence or Consciousness. The conditioned mind immediately assumes that "When" is a question of time.

 

The Sufis have a very nice saying, "Time is for the beginner, breath is for the finisher."

 

Sincerely,

 

-Adam