Bindi

Effort vs no-effort

358 posts in this topic

I'd say that most among us do not have a solid agreement on the term and meaning for "mind".

 

For instance Brian says, "no thought" but what does that mean? And can another thought describe it... ;-)

Mind = stream of thoughts

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a matter of perspective, or levels of understanding. At its a core, a basic confounding of the subject which was never the object. The ultimate understanding is that there is no jiva or even the concept of a jiva(and therefore no jivanmukta).

 

Or said another way, I am, before the body ever came into the picture. But from the level of understanding that the jiva has any reality unto itself, the idea is that behaviors continue as they must. For the jiva and jivanmukta alike, they will continue through the bodily form in accordance with one's yet to be exhausted "vasanas." The difference lies in that by being firmly established in the Absolute, the jivanmukta has transcended them and merely plays out the latent tendencies of the bodily form within his "final incarnation." Whereas the jiva, trapped in bondage by chains of his own making, will continue to "reincarnate" in accordance with those "vasanas" unless they are transcended by Self-realization.

 

From the level of understanding that jiva is Shiva, the jiva can do nothing as the jiva does not exist. Thus, any question, including the question of bondage is a moot point. Further... what talk can be had of earthly pleasures when one is, in reality, an embodiment of uninterrupted Bliss Absolute?

It seems to me that you are stating some sort of separation between the mind and the body. That the mind can be free (fully realized Self), but the body just continues on its own merry way of attachements (like smoking and drug addiction) and none of that matters.

 

But to me, "latent tendencies" are subconscious desires that keep the loop going. It is the basic definition of perpetuating the same karmic issues that existed in the first place. Body-mind is all the same thing (or one integrated whole). Either way, this point seems to very well highlight a major difference between different traditions as Buddha is very, very clear on this point...

 

You do not what you should.

You do what you should not.

You are reckless, and desire grows.

But the master is wakeful.

He watches his body.

In all his actions he discriminates,

And he becomes pure.

 

Also...

 

Do your work.

Make an end of sorrow.

For see how the jasmine

Releases and lets fall Its withered flowers.

Let fall wilfulness and hatred.

Are you quiet?

Quieten your body.

Quieten your mind.

You want nothing.

Your words are still.

You are still.

 

Also...

 

It is time to arise.

So arise!

Lest through irresolution and idleness

You lose the way.

Master your words.

Master your thoughts.

Never allow your body to do harm.

Follow these three roads with purity

And you will find yourself upon the one way,

The way of wisdom.

 

-Dhammapada,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that you are stating some sort of separation between the mind and the body. That the mind can be free (fully realized Self), but the body just continues on its own merry way of attachements (like smoking and drug addiction) and none of that matters.

 

But to me, "latent tendencies" are subconscious desires that keep the loop going. It is the basic definition of perpetuating the same karmic issues that existed in the first place. Body-mind is all the same thing (or one integrated whole). Either way, this point seems to very well highlight a major difference between different traditions as Buddha is very, very clear on this point...

 

You do not what you should.

You do what you should not.

You are reckless, and desire grows.

But the master is wakeful.

He watches his body.

In all his actions he discriminates,

And he becomes pure.

 

Also...

 

Do your work.

Make an end of sorrow.

For see how the jasmine

Releases and lets fall Its withered flowers.

Let fall wilfulness and hatred.

Are you quiet?

Quieten your body.

Quieten your mind.

You want nothing.

Your words are still.

You are still.

 

Also...

 

It is time to arise.

So arise!

Lest through irresolution and idleness

You lose the way.

Master your words.

Master your thoughts.

Never allow your body to do harm.

Follow these three roads with purity

And you will find yourself upon the one way,

The way of wisdom.

 

-Dhammapada,

 

We've done this before. It only ended in agreement to disagree. :)

 

The body-mind complex only appears to have independent existence as the jiva. It's the jiva's assumption he is in possession of an individual mind or body, when in truth, the individual merely appears to exist within Supreme Consciousness. You, if nothing, at least intuitively know this.

 

When the time comes for the dissolution of desires or the work of purification, then that will manifest. You are the ascension and the fallen, and neither. You are the way of avarice, and you are also the way of wisdom... and neither.

 

"As long as I am dreaming that I am being chased by a tiger, that dream tiger is as real as the one who is being chased. I have to run away as fast as I can to save myself from that tiger.

 

Only when I am awakened to the higher state of consciousness, are the tiger and the one whom the tiger is chasing, as well as the forest and the ground upon which I am running, all resolved into my own mind.

The dreamer thinks that the dream world is real until he is awakened to a higher state where there is only one mind that projects the world of plurality. The plurality is real as long as dream lasts.

 

You want to place one leg in the waking state and one leg in the dream state and then question the validity of each from the other reference point. Any question from the Brahman viewpoint whilst still sitting at the jiva position is like a dreamer asking about the waking mind. The waking mind is one – Advaita.

The plurality of the dream world is from the viewpoint of a dreamer who thinks he is different from the tiger and the trees in the forest." ~Nisargadatta Maharaj

 

Edited by neti neti
4 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've done this before. It only ended in agreement to disagree. :)

 

The body-mind complex only appears to have independent existence as the jiva. It's the jiva's assumption he is in possession of an individual mind or body, when in truth, the individual merely appears to exist within Supreme Consciousness. You, if nothing, at least intuitively know this.

 

When the time comes for the dissolution of desires or the work of purification, then that will manifest. You are the ascension and the fallen, and neither. You are the way of avarice, and you are also the way of wisdom... and neither.

Yes, we have done something similar before. :)

 

My point was to simply to point out that the views were different. Hopefully, you can agree with me that Ramana is saying something different than what Buddha is saying about various vasanas continuing? About whether the desires/habits of the body quiet or not?

2 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:closedeyes: I have no particular position. For some... speech, actions, their causes and effects must be scrutinized down to the molecular level to satisfy curiosity or to justify conclusions through the lens of one's personal experience. For "others", all that occurs as it pertains to this mortal frame is meaningless.

 

Within diversity there cannot be one without the other, there is no life without death, there is no raja without tama.

 

I'll agree insofar as there appears to be change and vacillation between modes of thought... simply stated, anything seems possible. It's all a matter of perspective, I only insist that the perceiver is One. When that's lost sight of, we'll continue highlighting differences between traditions ad-nauseam with indifference to the unifying factor which makes such diversity possible.

Edited by neti neti
3 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mind = stream of thoughts

The challenge with your definition goes to what may be subconscious level thoughts, not yet noticed by the conscious mind. Like... I need to have another cigarette... :)

2 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:closedeyes: I have no particular position. For some... speech, actions, their causes and effects must be scrutinized down to the molecular level to satisfy curiosity or to justify conclusions through the lens of one's personal experience. For "others", all that occurs as it pertains to this mortal frame is meaningless.

 

Within diversity there cannot be one without the other, there is no life without death, there is no raja without tama.

 

I'll agree insofar as there appears to be change and vacillation between modes of thought... simply stated, anything seems possible. It's all a matter of perspective, I only insist that the perceiver is One. When that's lost sight of, we'll continue highlighting differences between traditions ad-nauseam with indifference to the unifying factor which makes such diversity possible.

Haha... Oh well... I tried. :)

 

One teachers says ongoing vasanas are fine, you are still enlightened. The other says they drop. But, this also seems to potentially explain the descriptional differences between a Jivanmukta as compared to a great bodhisattva.

 

Thanks again for the discussion. :)

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha... Oh well... I tried. :)

 

One teachers says ongoing vasanas are fine, you are still enlightened. The other says they drop. But, this also seems to potentially explain the descriptional differences between a Jivanmukta as compared to a great bodhisattva.

 

Thanks again for the discussion. :)

 

And yet, all of the above rely on which assumption? The pleasure is all Mine. ;)

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, all of the above rely on which assumption? The pleasure is all Mine. ;)

The differences towards ongoing vasanas being ok or not? It is based upon Dwai's repeated quotes in this thread and my above quotes from Buddha in the dhammapada.

2 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The differences towards ongoing vasanas being ok or not? It is based upon Dwai's repeated quotes in this thread and my above quotes from Buddha in the dhammapada.

I offered an explanation as I see it in post #74, to which you only saw distinction between mind and body. I elaborated in post #78, and you still haven't responded to anything I've said. I guess it must just read like "blah blah blah." :D

 

So let's try this. To whom are the vasanas 'ok or not'?

Edited by neti neti
3 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me add that the Dhammapada belongs to the fifth volume that was added to the canon much later than the other four.  There are many statements in Khuddaka Nikaya that don't seem in keeping with the previous volumes, to me.

 

Also, there is a sermon (somewhere in the first four Nikayas, sorry I can't quote chapter and verse) where Gautama is asked about the status of a former monk who had passed away.  That monk was an alcoholic, and Gautama said he was a never-returner, which was something like one level below the ultimate in Gautama's descriptions of reincarnation.

 

Eventually, Gautama got so tired of Ananda asking him about the status of people after their deaths that he told Ananda just to look at how they lived their lives before they died and figure it out.

 

We know from Godel's theorems that it's not possible to start from a set of logical assumptions and describe everything that's known in mathematics without contradiction.  The set of logical assumptions that does not give rise to contradiction cannot describe the whole of what is known to be true in mathematics.  The first proofs formally established through the use of computer, a field which is relatively new of course, were Godel's (and I've read that Einstein only stayed on at Princeton for the pleasure of walking home with Godel--having said which, Godel starved himself to death when his wife went into a skilled nursing facility and could no longer eat first from his plate to ensure he was not being poisoned).

 

What I'm saying here is, that words that describe the human condition must always be insufficient, or they will result in contradiction.  This to me is the strength of Gautama's approach in the first four Nikayas--he speaks to the particulars of the human condition, and their relationship to one another, yet at his best he avoids trying to place them in an overall context.

 

Cessation can be many things.  Here are some of my favorite descriptions, from Gautama:

 

In the first meditative state (trance), dis-ease ceases.

In the second, unhappiness.

In the third, ease without equanimity.

In the fourth, happiness without equanimity.

In the first of the states marked by uniformity (with respect to sensory activity), the perception of multiplicity ceases.

In the second, the perception of the infinity of ether (which marked the first) ceases.

In the third, the perception of the infinity of consciousness (which marked the second) ceases.

In the fourth, the perception of the plane of "no-thing" (which marked the third) ceases.

In the last, the perception of "neither perception and sensation nor yet not perception and sensation" (which marked the fourth) ceases.

 

The last was precipitated for Gautama with the thought, "I have attained (the fourth), but all that is constructed and thought out is impermanent, is subject to ending"--something like that.  With that, (habitual activity in) perception and sensation ceased for him.

 

He came back with the four truths, to teach the five ascetics, who at first blew him off (since he was no longer an ascetic).  To my mind, the four truths are only truths when suffering exists, and the chain looks like this:

 

ignorance>habitual tendency or the exercise of volition>a stationing of consciousness>name-and-shape(discrimination)>senses(habitual or willful sensation and perception)>feeling>craving>grasping (after self in the five categories)

 

That last, he said was identically suffering.

 

Only applies, only has meaning, in the context of suffering, and for me there's nothing to be done about this.

 

In the end, Gautama spoke of his own way of living, not of enlightenment.  That way of living consisted of sixteen observations, trainings, and beholdings, each paired with either inhalation or exhalation. 

My study concerns the two sets of ligaments that support the last and penultimate vertebrae of the spine, during flexion and extension, and how the accent of the support in inhalation and exhalation allows gravity to work its magic through the sacrum and pelvis into the legs and back again into the support of the spine.

From my reading, there are two mechanisms in the support of the spine, one the stretch of the facia behind the sacrum by the mass of the extensors pressing rearward as they contract alternately, and the other occasioned by pressure in the "fluid ball" of the abdomen as it displaces the rest of the fascial sheet behind the lower spine.  The coordination of these mechanisms is autonomic, in the natural movement of breath.

3 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imho, the mind resting in the witness is the first step towards effortlessness. It takes some effort to get the mind to rest in the witness initially. Slowly it becomes natural for the mind to rest in the witness. Resting in the witness is being Present. Being present, one can then begin to act as action is needed, without worrying about the past and projecting into the future.

 

The hardest part imho is patience...ie for the mind to accept that patience is a necessary virtue in this path. Until there is Presence. That is the effort...to take a practice and keep doing it, without feeling bored, tired, exhausted etc etc. It takes a "trick" of not attaching to the results of said effort...if we think about the effort, we become impatient. 

 

So if we don't expect any results and just do the practice, it will become effortless after the initial effort. This is the effortlessness that is being referred to in terms of Wu Wei or Nishkama Karma. 

 

Also imho, Mind and Ego are non-different.

 

notice that in many things such as practice - it is happening - not by effort but because we are drawn to it.

We cannot do otherwise. We say "initial effort" but it is not effort - no more effort than practicing on your guitar.

 

The illusion wants to possess the "product" - fruits - but the fruits flow constantly and are only inhibited by the illusion.

As you are "doing" what you cannot do otherwise - being IN No-effort - is being IN Happening - and not in the illusion of control, and expectation - very much as you said above.

3 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the coordination of the two mechanisms of posture I spoke of above is an autonomic function in the movement of breath, the feeling is like this:

 

"When you find the place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point."
 

"When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point."

 

That's Dogen, from the first essay he wrote in Shobogenzo ("Genjo Koan"). 

 

Again we have the indication of two modalities of the senses whose coordination is critical to the sense of self, and the feeling of self-location (gravity, sight, equalibrium, proprioception).

 

Dogen finishes like this:

 

"Although actualized immediately, the inconceivable may not be readily apparent."

 

Dogen goes on to cite a koan where the discussion concerns "the wind which is everywhere", which I mentioned previously as the breath that got me out of a chair.

 

Gautama observed cessation in connection with inhalation and in connection with exhalation as one of the sixteen elements that made up his way of living, both before and after his enlightenment (chapter on "Intent Concentration on In-Breathing and Out-Breathing in volume V of Sanyutta Nikaya).

Edited by Mark Foote
2 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I offered an explanation as I see it in post #74, to which you only saw distinction between mind and body. I elaborated in post #78, and you still haven't responded to anything I've said. I guess it must just read like "blah blah blah." :D

 

So let's try this. To whom are the vasanas 'ok or not' to?

Your posts 74 & 78 presuppose there being a "Self" and also a "Jiva", there are no such "things" in other traditions. You are effectively stating that since all "independent beings" are really just really just remote drones of the mother ship, it doesn't matter the specific form of the remote drone as it will cease anyways.

 

Vasanas dropping or not is very relevant as it directly relates to possible delusion and being trapped in samsara. As an example, let assume that you are correct and there is a universal God/Self. Then let us say you are a habitual drug addict who gets great pleasure from taking all of your drugs. That is gives you a bliss like experience of seeing and knowing God. Hence, you always need and want your drugs. Since you are always high on your drugs, everything is always perfect.

 

But what happens, when you stop taking your drugs? Was it real or an artificial bubble of illusion?

 

If there is no problem with "good" vasanas, why would there logically be an issue with "bad" vasanas? Additionally, does not even the separation of their being good or vasanas itself imply relative duality?

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

notice that in many things such as practice - it is happening - not by effort but because we are drawn to it.

We cannot do otherwise. We say "initial effort" but it is not effort - no more effort than practicing on your guitar.

 

The illusion wants to possess the "product" - fruits - but the fruits flow constantly and are only inhibited by the illusion.

As you are "doing" what you cannot do otherwise - being IN No-effort - is being IN Happening - and not in the illusion of control, and expectation - very much as you said above.

You are quite accurate in your observation. There is a certain "joy" in the effort being applied (it is not a chore)...

Is that still effort? I don't know!

2 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

boy oh boy, anybody here with or without a body/mind getting a headache in their only apparently existing skull?

Edited by 3bob
5 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your posts 74 & 78 presuppose there being a "Self" and also a "Jiva", there are no such "things" in other traditions. You are effectively stating that since all "independent beings" are really just really just remote drones of the mother ship, it doesn't matter the specific form of the remote drone as it will cease anyways.

 

Vasanas dropping or not is very relevant as it directly relates to possible delusion and being trapped in samsara. As an example, let assume that you are correct and there is a universal God/Self. Then let us say you are a habitual drug addict who gets great pleasure from taking all of your drugs. That is gives you a bliss like experience of seeing and knowing God. Hence, you always need and want your drugs. Since you are always high on your drugs, everything is always perfect.

 

But what happens, when you stop taking your drugs? Was it real or an artificial bubble of illusion?

 

If there is no problem with "good" vasanas, why would there logically be an issue with "bad" vasanas? Additionally, does not even the separation of their being good or vasanas itself imply relative duality?

 

Well for communication's sake, words can be useful at times. :) However, that which the word points to does not exist simply by reason of the word's existence. That applies to all traditions. There is no question that you are, that much is self-evident. What must be investigated is who you are, ultimately.

 

Not a remote drone... you, and yet, not you. When you know who you are, every-thing temporal is rendered null and void. Being without beginning or end, every-thing observed within the reference of space/time becomes beyond the notions of relevance or irrelevance.

 

The "delusion" is that there's a possibility for "delusion" which has not been self-imposed or, a "samsara" in which one has been forced to be a wanderer or... a druggie forced to plunge the needle in his vein. It's all an illusion, a part of the creative script, the power of lila.

 

What I've effectively said is that, all that appears to exist, appears to exist within consciousness, as consciousness. That includes me, you and this discussion. To drive this point home... I've effectively said nothing.

 

 

"All that is heard is nonexistent."~Adi Sankara

Edited by neti neti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

boy oh boy, anybody here with or without a body/mind getting a headache in their only apparently existing head?

 

If the Buddhists and Hindus ever come to agreement it will likely mean the old life cycle has ended and a new one has begun.

4 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH, Maybe, but then doesn't the same conundrum  recycle all over again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

boy oh boy, anybody here with or without a body/mind getting a headache in their only apparently existing skull?

 

I am. If I can muster up enough effort, I'll go find an aspirin. Hopefully the placebo kicks in before the meds. :P

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyway breaking dharma and making karma can only be done where there is dharma and karma,  can some of us agree on that without going into abstractions about the absolute and real illusions?  

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MH, Maybe, but then doesn't the same conundrum  recycle all over again?

 

No.  Only one person needs walk a different path and untold alternate events will occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyway breaking dharma and making karma can only be done where there is dharma and karma,  can some of us agree on that without going into abstractions about the absolute and real illusions?  

 

We can. So long as we don't neglect that we, the dharmas and the karmas are also abstractions.

1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my body/mind could feel that one coming, but was it really my body/mind since one of those body snatchers got it (like they did with Donald Sutherland) when I was sleeping but only apparently so since the sub-conscious recorded everything...Scream!!

Edited by 3bob
2 people thank this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No.  Only one person needs walk a different path and untold alternate events will occur.

 

Ok MH, don't kiss that old/new girl friend when you come back around next time and then lets see what happens to the multi-verse?

Edited by 3bob
1 person thanks this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites