Is enlightenment really desirable?

[Bud Jetsun]

What takes 'time', including up to all of the moment is the picking up and constructing and shaping of some models which are not reality.  Laying down models with sincerity must happen through a mindfully unbreakable choice to appreciate the wonder of what may be as it is.  

 

Even when the whole of the models shape becomes a singular imfathomable indivisible energy, the model remains a replacement of experiencing the imfathomable energy. 

 

The imfathomable nature of reality remains unimpressed by the most sincere of human meditative efforts to comprehend it in the same way the device you're reading this on uses binary pulses of 0101011's to arrive at an understanding of the nature of it's own transistors transmitting the 0's and 1's to propagate this pattern of pixels. 

 

Atoms pondering atoms, cells pondering cells, gives rise to the illusion of us as separate beings pondering separate beings and whatever that days flavor in models about what may be. What may be remains undiminished in a timeless perfect balance which is not important for aspects of our minds to imagine understanding. 

 

In compassion, may all aspects of all of your models suddenly release from being the burden one once carried and shatter irreparably to be blown away in winds of Now. 

 

Commit like your landing ramp begins at 100ft away and explode off the lip using every bit of strength of body and force-of-will understanding they all splatter into a shambles from any lesser effort than full commitment. The jump is exactly in range of every beings jumping capability, but no margin to take any constructed burdens. 

 

Unlimited Love, 

-Bud

Edited October 28, 2017 by Bud Jetsun

[Bud Jetsun]

4 hours ago, rene said:

 

After first reading the DDJ 40 yrs ago, I asked Laozi for more... more of his words! lol

 

This is what he whispered in my ear:

 

What could I show you

that you have not already seen?

 

What could I tell you

that you have not already heard?

 

What could you learn

that you do not already understand?

 

There is no need to be kind, just be yourself.

Kindness comes naturally.

 

There is no need to be just.

As a whole human, you are already just.

 

Being who you are in your heart,

brings everything.

 

You already know these things.

They are naturally known, because they are natural.

 

What more could I say that would be of any use?

 

Seems Laozi agrees with your idea, silent thunder. (-:

 

warm greetings

 

 

Reading this through, on multiple occasions spontaneously increased my beards formation of eye salt accumulated in deep gratitude. 

 

Unlimited Love, 

-Bud

[rene]

4 hours ago, C T said:

Not sure about tradition D, but tradition B certainly does not encourage giving up self, nor renouncing only self. What tradition B does encourage, however, is to find out for oneself if life is lived better when there is a strong clinging onto notions of an independently existing self. If the answer is yes, then one must therefore live the truth of that assertion; to do otherwise is what creates conflict, and conflict, as we know, can wreak havoc on so many levels. If the answer is no, again, one follows the same path of living accordingly. What can cause confusion though is the tendency to live undecidedly, switching from one mindset to another so as to fit the self to situations, when in fact, upon searching with some fearless honesty, its clear this cannot be effectively done, because repeatedly, one will likely come upon a small problem -

(my bold)

You have outlined nicely what I call 'either/or' thinking. I agree it causes much confusion, trying to hop on one foot and then the other...rather than finding a way to stand on Both at the same time...which can absolutely be utilized in all situations. I agree that keeping them perceived as isolate (from each other) and needing to be hopped between is difficult for most to mitigate.

 

 

Quote

and this problem is that 99.9% of all our thoughts, our internal and external dialogues, our actions, are all done for the mere ideas we hold of a self-existing entity known as 'Myself'.

 

In this, our perspectives part ways.

 

Although the initial words in your quote: " ...tradition B certainly does not encourage giving up self, nor renouncing only self." suggests one thing - the underlying essence of your word choices of 'self-existing entity' and  'What tradition B does encourage, however, is to find out for oneself if life is lived better when there is a strong clinging onto notions of an independently existing self.'  is that it is better to make that particular choice; i.e...stay hopping on one foot, and that foot only.

 

 

Quote

 

Herein lies the eternal damnation of existence - we want to fit a made-up, illusory self to situations, when all the while, the wise move would be to enable the intelligent or enlightening aspect of consciousness to create situations whereby one does not become duped by the falsity of such a fence-hopping premise.

 

It seems the wise would be able to stand on both sides of the fence simultaneously; realizing that 'creating situations' is an unnecessary expenditure of energy in an unboundaried reality.

 

Quote

When we finally tire of chasing after something non-existent (no mountains, right?), what happens? For some of us, this can result in the realisation that we have exhausted all our options, and finally, in our frail-like non-self we let go, or give up.. the clinging falls away. When the clinging to that which we mistakenly cherish more than anything else in the world ends, the subsequent result can get very interesting... So in tradition B, practitioners are told to devote attention to that process, usually thru contemplative practices. Its a lifetime's work for me and some of the folks I know here, and away from here. 

 

Very interesting ideas and methods in tradition B, C T, and I thank you for sharing them. To me, it seems like a very long and frequently frustrating way around the barn; yet if one enjoys their journey - what could be wrong with that? (-:

 

Again, thanks for your words; most appreciated.

 

warmest regards

 

[ljazztrumpet]

11 hours ago, C T said:

From the Mahayana perspective, its not that the self is false, but the notion of an independently existing entity (as the self) that is truly false. When this is realised, it is said that compassion will arise spontaneously from having uncovered the clear sightedness of dependent origination. At around the same time that this clarity begins to reveal its unbounded essence, the aspiring bodhisattva will actually begin to gradually discard arrogant notions of self-independence, and this in turn will arouse compassionate views that will eventually lead the aspirant to consider others (the bodhisattvas are first taught conceptually to regard all beings as having been their parents at one time or another) as even more important than the self-ideating self, if that makes any sense. 

But in some Buddhist traditions/teachings, as well as advaitic, it seems that the traditional teaching advises cultivating the values of love, kindness, compassion, and service first, and that sets the 'fertile ground' for realizations of the clear sightedness of dependent origin.

 

That being said, one of the practices I do, John Sherman's 'Self-Directed Attention' exercise, is about clearing away the 'fear of life' and, then, what's left is that compassion. So perhaps approach this in two different directions is ideal. 

[9th]

9 hours ago, ljazztrumpet said:

But in some Buddhist traditions/teachings, as well as advaitic, it seems that the traditional teaching advises cultivating the values of love, kindness, compassion, and service first, and that sets the 'fertile ground' for realizations of the clear sightedness of dependent origin. 

 

Its considered a supportive endeavor in that it has a collective benefit and is also what you will be doing anyway once you truly are established in shunyata. In other words, "fake it till you make it".

 

Compassion is a direct, naturally flowing result of actual realization, but the monkey mind has to put in some significant effort to achieve it.

[Marblehead]

Monkeys don't have much compassion.

 

[Stosh]

3 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Monkeys don't have much compassion.

 

No they dont, the difference  is that humans can equate others with self ..sometimes. 

[Stosh]

How mushy generous compassionate loving and selfless would one be, if it always worked out .? I imagine we would be as goofy as puppies. 

[C T]

7 hours ago, Stosh said:

How mushy generous compassionate loving and selfless would one be, if it always worked out .? I imagine we would be as goofy as puppies. 

Only on some mundane levels does it not go past the goofiness and mushiness. As wisdom develops, the generosity takes on a broader scope, selflessness is uncovered, leading to actions that are free from karmic rebounds (which is suggested to be the Buddhist equivalent of wei wu wei) since there is no attachment to a self that experiences the emotional entanglements often associated with the often misunderstood notions of what constitutes 'compassion' in its broader sense. 

[9th]

This has been posted a few times already, but its always worth a review in the light of any current context - as there is a certain significant and increasingly intense need for clarity in the more subtle realms of practice considering the ongoing state of the human world and its relationship to Sat.

 

Quote

Therefore, when light is very brilliant, when it reflects on things properly and fully, we know that there is some kind of communication taking place. That communication is expressed by the intensity of that wisdom light shining through.  That communication is traditionally known as buddha-activity or compassion.
 

Compassion is not so much feeling sorry for somebody, feeling that you are in a better place and somebody is in a worse place. Compassion is not having any hesitation to reflect your light on things. That reflection is an automatic and natural process, an organic process. Since light has no hesitation, no inhibition about reflecting on things, it does not discriminate whether to reflect on a pile of shit or on a pile of rock or on a pile of diamonds. It reflects on everything it faces.

So that non-hesitating light reflects without choice all the time; it shines brilliantly and constantly on all things. It isn't our duty to go around the corner and convert someone. This is a different approach. Whatever needs to be reflected on is reflected on, and whatever needs to be done is done - on the spot.

 

Maybe that idea doesn't seem to be particularly crazy from your point of view. You might think that if somebody is crazy, he won't leave you any space at all. He will just roll all over you and vomit all over you and make diarrhea all over you. He will make you terribly crazy, too; he will extend his own craziness. But this craziness is not so neurotic; it's just basic craziness, which is fearlessness and not giving up anything. Not giving up anything is the basic point. At the same time, you are willing to work with what is there on the basis of its primordial wakeful quality.

 

Yeshe Chölwa is connected not only with reflecting on things, it is also connected with the space around things. The crazy wisdom person provides immense space or environment around things. That environment is completely thronged with the energy of its own fearless wisdom. When a crazy wisdom person decides to work with you, when he decides to liberate you, you become his victim. You have no way to run away from him. If you try to run backward, that space has been already covered; if you try to run forward, that space has also been covered. You have a feeling of choicelessness in regard to the particular teacher that you relate with, so your relationship becomes very natural and open. So the crazy wisdom teacher is somewhat dictatorial. The space he creates is thronged, filled with a strong charge of heavy enlightenment, heavy primordial sanity.

 

For another take on this kind of thing, here is a ridiculous piece of music I made some years ago about this very topic...

the moment of truth.mp3

 

[Stosh]

11 hours ago, C T said:

On not go past the goofiness and mushiness. As wisdom develops, the generosity takes on a broader scope, selflessness is uncovered, leading to actions that are free from karmic rebounds (which is suggested to be the Buddhist equivalent of wei wu wei) since there is no attachment to a self that experiences the emotional entanglements often associated with the often misunderstood notions of what constitutes 'compassion' in its broader sense. 

The thing I was suggesting was that people would be nicer if they believed that it was a tenable thing to do.Thinking That they would not get a swift kick for being honest or explaining or just because they werent actually significant to others. 

Someone starts a thread with a question , and then never acknowledges the replies and so forth. 

When the reception is seen as insignificant ,as in a game , then the downside dwindles to nothing. But if you put big emphasis and attention on the conversation a snub becomes a big deal.

Its an ironic blessing to be all wrapped up in yourself , because you will tend take the reactions of others 

lightly, casually, smoothly. 

Edited October 29, 2017 by Stosh

[C T]

14 minutes ago, Stosh said:

The thing I was suggesting was that people would be nicer if they believed that it was a tenable thing to do.Thinking That they would not get a swift kick for being honest or explaining or just because they werent actually significant to others. 

Someone starts a thread with a question , and then never acknowledges the replies and so forth. 

 

 

Im not sure...I dont think just believing in the tenability of it is sufficient to make people nicer. 

What makes people nicer? IMo putting in the effort to cultivate the methods. Training the mind on the Paramitas. That makes people nicer. 

 

Yes, it seems to be a common practice here where threads are started and abandoned almost immediately by the OP. Maybe admin can think of something to prevent serial abandonment - its a nuisance. 

Edited October 29, 2017 by C T

[Stosh]

12 minutes ago, C T said:

 

Im not sure...I dont think just believing in the tenability of it is sufficient to make people nicer. 

What makes people nicer? IMo putting in the effort to cultivate the methods. Training the mind on the Paramitas. That makes people nicer. 

Why do you think people want to see others being nice ? Then they feel its safe for them to be as well, and what happens when they see roughness? they try to protect themselves.  Try being nice and gentle with someone and see if they dont tend to reciprocate. That would only happen if there is a motivation to be nicer then they usually act.  

Then they will bump up against their preconcieved notions of how far they can go before being a sucker or doormat or whatever ,which is taught by the slings and arrows of prior experience. They deem going so far as that ,as untenable.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Stosh

[C T]

1 minute ago, Stosh said:

Why do you think people want to see others being nice ? Then they feel its safe for them to be as well, and what happens when they see roughness? they try to protect themselves.  Try being nice and gentle with someone and see if they dont tend to reciprocate. That would only happen if there is a motivation to be nicer then they usually act. 

Some people will protect themselves no matter what - distrust is a deep-seated emotion. Not all the time, but it can be that sometimes maintaining a neutral demeanour is the highest form of 'nice'. Inside remain neutral, outwardly practice kindness. Thats my advice to myself. 

[Stosh]

11 minutes ago, C T said:

Some people will protect themselves no matter what - distrust is a deep-seated emotion. Not all the time, but it can be that sometimes maintaining a neutral demeanour is the highest form of 'nice'. Inside remain neutral, outwardly practice kindness. Thats my advice to myself. 

If you ask me I think youre wasting your nice behavior if you dont enjoy it. 

Yes some people do distrust a lot. But that is still the same paradigm , they fear , so they consider the behavior untenable,  because it doesnt feel safe. 

They expect a kick in the nuts.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Stosh

[C T]

6 minutes ago, Stosh said:

If you ask me I think youre wasting your nice behavior if you dont enjoy it. 

Yes some people do distrust a lot. But that is still the same paradigm , they fear , so they consider the behavior untenable,  because it doesnt feel safe. 

What gave you the impression that i even support the idea of being nice? There are lots of unhappy people who try to be nice everyday without much conviction, who pay lip service and forced by economic circumstances to be 'nice'. Being nice can promote victimhood. Dont be nice - practice being kind instead, without expectations and not under economic spells. 

Edited October 29, 2017 by C T

[steve]

On 10/26/2017 at 9:46 PM, rene said:

 

Does enlightenment, as being free from delusions, also include the delusion of being free from delusion?

 

Yes

 

Edited to add - perhaps that is the most important aspect?

Edited October 29, 2017 by steve

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, C T said:

What gave you the impression that i even support the idea of being nice? There are lots of unhappy people who try to be nice everyday without much conviction, who pay lip service and forced by economic circumstances to be 'nice'. Being nice can promote victimhood. Dont be nice - practice being kind instead, without expectations and not under economic spells. 

No thanks. I see value in sincerity. I hold it high esteem. I can risk the kick in the pants often enough. And reserve falsity for those who earn it. If My actions are false to myself then it is not me being manifested, and if I am going to sustain against the trials which are presented , then at least I got to be manifested. If you have to go though a pretense , a sham , insincere deceit , in order to be kindly , then the truth is that you are not warmly disposed . Truly the world will not know the difference if you make it convincing, the wish to see each other in both favorable and unfavorable lights is strong. 

[C T]

1 minute ago, Stosh said:

 I see value in sincerity. 

That is the point I was making. Disband the superficial niceties; dispense with the false smileys. There is a culture developing now where people are defining themselves, and others, by the number of facebook likes. People writing sweet words, being nice to one another on social media, simply to stave off dealing with reality. A culture of niceness brewing nicely, indeed. 

[rene]

1 hour ago, steve said:

 

Yes

 

Edited to add - perhaps that is the most important aspect?

 

It is, imo, as the very last barrier to a blended perspective.

[rene]

2 hours ago, C T said:

Yes, it seems to be a common practice here where threads are started and abandoned almost immediately by the OP. Maybe admin can think of something to prevent serial abandonment - its a nuisance. 

 

Probably we could, but maybe a light-touch staff is more helpful to each bum's practice; more opportunity to look at what bothers you and why. Dark with the light, and all that.

[Stosh]

You said you PRACTICE being kind, not BE nice, and tied being nice with lip service and victimhood.  Whatever verbal twist might be in play I will accept ,that which you seem to intend, is meant. 

If in your tradition, a view of enlightenment undermines the spontaneous desire to be warm , since the self is suspect of persistance anyway.. you might perhaps feel that the best one can do is present the appearance of actually giving a shit about others , while pursuing detatchment or disentanglement with the delusioned.

[Stosh]

2 hours ago, C T said:

 

Im not sure...I dont think just believing in the tenability of it is sufficient to make people nicer. 

What makes people nicer? IMo putting in the effort to cultivate the methods. Training the mind on the Paramitas. That makes people nicer. 

 

Yes, it seems to be a common practice here where threads are started and abandoned almost immediately by the OP. Maybe admin can think of something to prevent serial abandonment - its a nuisance. 

I always figured that there should be some kind of terminus to threads and abandoned ones esp. But I would just get voted against, folks seem to want to persist forever in the shrine of data storage, a wish for immortality. 

[C T]

10 minutes ago, rene said:

 

Probably we could, but maybe a light-touch staff is more helpful to each bum's practice; more opportunity to look at what bothers you and why. Dark with the light, and all that.

Dont bother me at all. Like when i go camping in the islands off Malaysia - bugs and mosquitoes, snakes and centipedes -endless nuisances, but there are things to do, places to go, shooting stars to gaze in the twilight, things that bind the spirit and make the heart sing, so yeah, dark with the light, and all that. 

[Starjumper]

Once a person experiences enlightenment the foundational realization they have is about the importance of Slack, part of which is distancing yourself from the normals!   Let's face it, most people are anal jerks, racing each other to be first to the slaughterhouse, and taking you along with them! (@ 2:25).  This video explains it well and contains the wisdom and realizations of the ages.  

 

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by Starjumper