Differences between dualism and non-dualism

[Bindi]

9 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Couldn't or chose not to?  I don't know which.  They have plenty of healing and longlife practices in Tibetan Buddhism ... in fact if you watch the film about Namkhai Norbu (is it called voyage round my father ?) he does get sick and heal himself.
 

 

Same for the Buddha, “When the Blessed One had thus entered upon the rainy season there fell upon him a dire sickness, and sharp pains came upon him even unto death. But the Blessed One, mindful and self-possessed, bore his ailments without complaint. 
 

Then this thought occurred to the Blessed One, “It would not be right for me to pass away from life without addressing the disciples, without taking leave of the order. Let me now, by a strong effort of the will, subdue this sickness, and keep my hold on life till the allotted time have come.” 
 

And the Blessed One, by a strong effort of the will subdued the sickness, and kept his hold on life till the time he fixed upon should come. And the sickness abated. 

Thus the Blessed One began to recover, and when he had quite got rid of the sickness, he went out from the monastery, and sat down on a seat spread out in the open air.” 
 

As Mark posted above, he put his death off for 3 months. 
 

This is no simple acceptance like Ramana Maharshi’s, the Buddha must have had a very powerful will and actively used it to be able to deliberately extend his life. 
 

IME and FWIW Qi healing doesn’t require will, it’s set up differently, more to do with Qi energy flowing than willpower. 

 

Quote

 

 

It depends - if you can see future karma and lives you might just think hey ho on to the next one

 

 

Yes but ... at some level what exactly the physical body is - or perhaps how it is experienced changes - after all the phys bod is a great mystery in itself.

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by Bindi

[Apech]

5 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

Same for the Buddha, “When the Blessed One had thus entered upon the rainy season there fell upon him a dire sickness, and sharp pains came upon him even unto death. But the Blessed One, mindful and self-possessed, bore his ailments without complaint. 
 

Then this thought occurred to the Blessed One, “It would not be right for me to pass away from life without addressing the disciples, without taking leave of the order. Let me now, by a strong effort of the will, subdue this sickness, and keep my hold on life till the allotted time have come.” 
 

And the Blessed One, by a strong effort of the will subdued the sickness, and kept his hold on life till the time he fixed upon should come. And the sickness abated. 

Thus the Blessed One began to recover, and when he had quite got rid of the sickness, he went out from the monastery, and sat down on a seat spread out in the open air.” 
 

As Mark posted above, he put his death off for 3 months. 
 

This is no simple acceptance like Ramana Maharshi’s, the Buddha must have had a very powerful will and actively used it to be able to deliberately extend his life. 
 

IME and FWIW Qi healing doesn’t require will, it’s set up differently, more to do with Qi energy flowing than willpower. 

 

 

 

 

My teacher of many years died in 1987 of cancer - and even before that he was semi-paralysed on one side and had other ailments.  He always worked with people and had a large group that he did individual work with and also gave talks and wot not.  I once asked him why he did just become a hermit and use his powers to heal himself.  He thought briefly and said he probably could do that but preferred to work with others.  He kept on to more or less the end when he was basically laid low and then died.  It was a big shock to me because despite everything I had regarded him as virtually immortal.  He certainly didn't 'accept' in the usual sense and took all sorts of measures to prolong his life - as if he kept striking deals with God to say 'keep me going for a bit longer and I'll do this ...'

 

It's partly from him plus my own meagre researches that I came to understand that the work has two main phases - you might say 'seeing it' and then 'being it' ... not that these two are not combined much of the time - but there is one completion which is becoming aware of the nature of things, of the Atman if you like, and a further much longer path which is about completely becoming it i.e. immortal - which is why I say enlightened and immortal.  You can see the essence and the nature of your consciousness but then there is the task of complete integration of all levels of being into it.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by Apech

[Apech]

4 hours ago, Bindi said:

I wasn’t able to play it, but it does sound quite interesting, I tried to buy it to watch online but couldn’t even manage that. 

 

Why wouldn't it play?

[Mark Foote]

7 hours ago, Apech said:

 

It's partly from him plus my own meagre researches that I came to understand that the work has two main phases - you might say 'seeing it' and then 'being it'...

 

 

I think there's a traditional Zen saying that goes, "hear it, see it, gain it."

[ralis]

11 hours ago, Bindi said:

I wasn’t able to play it, but it does sound quite interesting, I tried to buy it to watch online but couldn’t even manage that. 

 

It's on Amazon Prime and there is a free 7 day trial for it.

 

https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/amzn1.dv.gti.94a9f7bd-807e-693a-376e-6328f2372b7b?ref_=imdbref_tt_wbr_pvc_docuramaFilms&tag=imdbtag_tt_wbr_pvc_docuramaFilms-20

[Bindi]

10 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 

My teacher of many years died in 1987 of cancer - and even before that he was semi-paralysed on one side and had other ailments.  He always worked with people and had a large group that he did individual work with and also gave talks and wot not.  I once asked him why he did just become a hermit and use his powers to heal himself.  He thought briefly and said he probably could do that but preferred to work with others.  He kept on to more or less the end when he was basically laid low and then died.  It was a big shock to me because despite everything I had regarded him as virtually immortal.  He certainly didn't 'accept' in the usual sense and took all sorts of measures to prolong his life - as if he kept striking deals with God to say 'keep me going for a bit longer and I'll do this ...'

 

It's partly from him plus my own meagre researches that I came to understand that the work has two main phases - you might say 'seeing it' and then 'being it' ... not that these two are not combined much of the time - but there is one completion which is becoming aware of the nature of things, of the Atman if you like, and a further much longer path which is about completely becoming it i.e. immortal - which is why I say enlightened and immortal.  You can see the essence and the nature of your consciousness but then there is the task of complete integration of all levels of being into it.

 

 

Is the ‘nature of your consciousness’ the multiple perception filters through which consciousness gathers information? So we need to identify the filters? 

[Bindi]

10 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Why wouldn't it play?

I have no idea, it just wouldn’t start playing and I tried it multiple times. 

[Bindi]

Do the ‘nondually awakened’ believe that there is no further awakening to come? 
 

 https://liveanddare.com/neo-advaita/8/

[stirling]

On 5/21/2022 at 11:12 AM, schroedingerscat said:

In a way we perceive the world through these concepts. 

 

It is true that perceiving the world THROUGH concepts is one way to see it, but it isn't necessary. It is entirely possible to see and interact with the world without conceptualizing or creating models of the entirety of reality as it is. 

 

Quote

Physics doesn't lie. Ohms law doesn't lie. Gravity doesn't lie.

 

They may be measurable results with a satisfying internal consistency, but that doesn't mean that they adequately model reality as it is actually is any better than Newtonian physics does. It isn't that they don't "lie" it is just that they work within their narrow application. 

 

Quote

If it seems to lie, it just means your theory of the reality is here incomplete or something else in the equation was influenced unnoticed. So maybe it isn't unphysical rules per se, but just physical rules that haven't been as neatly discovered and been put in a theory as the others yet, as they are maybe to subtle or to seldom.

 

So, you are saying that scientific theories represent reality? Ask yourself this: Is it possible that a subset of factors could be used to model the entirety of the universe EXACTLY?

 

Quote

At some points those 'rules' seem to collide, like for example, when some meditators (often in occurance with breath exercises) have troubles to regulate their body temperature, or others talking about 'heart attack like effects' on the body (arrhytmics, torsade de points, PEA - something that I'd like to call 'energetics' here... hence dual and non dual coming together here maybe) that are usually not seen on an ECG (as it's not the standard emergency case as the practioner seems do be able to deal with it themselves ? ), and the talk of the three burners (even for non meditators) inside etc. etc.

 

Are all phenomena measurable? Is a measurement the event itself, or a correlation of the event? Is a flicker of electricity in the brain a thought? Does it mean that the brain is where the thought originates?

 

Quote

>>Edit: admittedly used a very wide notion of the term 'nondual' here, - here it reads as that which is not understood by physics, - and not necessarily something necessarily related to gnosis and its effects etc. sorry.

 

Oh... it's fine. Think of the non-dual in this instance as phenomena which cannot be separated from each other because of their interconnected nature.

[steve]

Do Nondualistas Dream of Rainbow Sheep?

 

 

 

 

 

[stirling]

On 5/20/2022 at 9:34 AM, ralis said:

My question is,; are there differences at the root of experience? Perhaps perceptional differences? Many seek out the higher vibe which is believed to be the ultimate. 
 

Many believe that Dzogchen is non energetic, but that wasn’t my experience. 

 

Sorry for the lateness of this reply, life has been... interesting.

 

I personally don't believe the experience of Rigpa is different from tradition to tradition, but the way it might be described or contextualized might be. Someone with a different tradition or practice history might describe or notice certain characteristics as opposed to someone else's experience. I also think that the way the insight deepens depends to some degree on someones tradition/practice history, or perhaps more importantly, on the lack of attachment to those conditioned or believed experiences. Speaking for myself, I have noticed the characteristics of Advaita Vedanta, Bhagavad Gita, as well as Dzogchen and Zen in moment to moment experiencing, and have felt a sort of continuum from the beginning of it to this day perhaps starting with something that most resonated with a Advaita Vedanta feel and eventually moving to something most like the Vajrayana recognition all appearances are dharmakaya manifesting. When speaking about it all I personally favor neutral or plain language that seems most accurate to ME, rather than tradition specific language. 

 

Was your energetic experience at the "awakening" moment, or just during your practice history? I think there can be energetic experiences, but they are merely experiences - not related to the precipitation of the insight ultimately. I have met people from other traditions that have had kundalini or energy "experiences", but his was not my experience. I think having an energy experience could happen to someone in any tradition. 

[stirling]

On 5/21/2022 at 3:31 PM, Bindi said:

This could be the basis of the ‘moral’ attainment that I feel is missing in nondual awakening, going beyond impartiality, maybe evidence that someone has authentically arrived at the highest possible expression of humanness. 

 

7 Point Mind Training in Tibetan Buddhism is an example of a non-dual "moral" training. Worth investigating if you are open to it.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Great-Path-Awakening-Commentary-Mahayana/dp/0877734208

 

Would I be correct in assuming that non-dual understanding will be a way station in your model of practice?

Edited May 25, 2022 by stirling

[dwai]

26 minutes ago, stirling said:

 

Sorry for the lateness of this reply, life has been... interesting.

 

I personally don't believe the experience of Rigpa is different from tradition to tradition, but the way it might be described or contextualized might be. Someone with a different tradition or practice history might describe or notice certain characteristics as opposed to someone else's experience. I also think that the way the insight deepens depends to some degree on someones tradition/practice history, or perhaps more importantly, on the lack of attachment to those conditioned or believed experiences. Speaking for myself, I have noticed the characteristics of Advaita Vedanta, Bhagavad Gita, as well as Dzogchen and Zen in moment to moment experiencing, and have felt a sort of continuum from the beginning of it to this day perhaps starting with something that most resonated with a Advaita Vedanta feel and eventually moving to something most like the Vajrayana recognition all appearances are dharmakaya manifesting. When speaking about it all I personally favor neutral or plain language that seems most accurate to ME, rather than tradition specific language. 

 

Was your energetic experience at the "awakening" moment, or just during your practice history? I think there can be energetic experiences, but they are merely experiences - not related to the precipitation of the insight ultimately. I have met people from other traditions that have had kundalini or energy "experiences", but his was not my experience. I think having an energy experience could happen to someone in any tradition. 

What’s very clear is that the mind likes to attach to experiences. That’s what the mind is meant to do.  I was explaining to a very young friend yesterday who’s has clearly realized, but whose mind is very intrigued by “experiences” still. 
 

The mind wants to expand — to have more experiences. The storehouse of impressions wants to store those experiences and resulting thoughts, emotions, feelings. The intellect is always curious about “new” things. And the ego always wants to label and appropriate those experiences.

 

So, chasing/elevating/memorializing experiences, is the “normal” response. 
 

Nondual realization is not an experience. It can never be one. Because in order to experience, there must be an experiencer and the phenomenon that is being experienced. Realization is a recognition of being (awareness/consciousness without objects). At most one can concede that prior to realization there is the experience of no objects (aka nirvikalpa samadhi) in a still/silent mind. 

 

Spoiler

Is there any sadhana after the attainment of jfiana? We have already shown that the idea of the mystics or dhyana-yogins that after the attainment of self-knowledge through reasoning, one should try by dhyana, samadhi or intuition to identify oneself with Brahman, is due to the ignorance of the traditional techinque taught by Vedanta. For, by the knowledge 'I am Brahman' one becomes Brahman- brahmavid brahmai 'va bhavati. Therefore, there is no need for further effort to attain what has been attained. It is not that he wills himself to be Brahman; for, if he is not already Brahman, how can he become what he is not? The real nature of a thing never under- goes change. If anything about a thing changes, that changing factor cannot be its real nature. If my Brahman- hood is to be brought about, then that Brahman-hood could not have been my real nature. Whatever is affected by karma or volition will wear out in course of time when the force of karma wears out. Liberation or Brahman- hood is not something which can be wrought by dhyana
or even by jiiana. Samyakjiiana or ripe knowledge is vastutantra, that is to say, controlled by or determined by the nature of the thing itself. The real nature of a thing is not something which can be manipulated by a person's will (puru~atantra) nor by knowledge (buddhi-. tantra), The function of reason in the field of brahma- vidya is simply the removal of mithyajiiana or wrong knowledge, the Self or Brahman, which is of the very nature of knowledge or awareness, remaining as it is. Therefore, the only thing the jiianin has to do, if at all he is to do anything by way of sadhana, is just to remember what he has already realized through avastbatraya-vicara. This remembrance of the truth of one's own nature and of

the nature of the universe is automatic in those who have already undergone the preparatory disciplines, and have controlled the senses and the passions and have tranquillised the mind. But in the case of those who have not under- gone the sadhanas, their remembrance is !Jbstructed by the habits of thinking, feeling and willing formed previous to enlightenment. In such cases there might be a little conflict between the truth realized and the accumulated habits or vasanas. Our old ways of thinking, feeling and willing have to be changed in order to fit in with the new realization. Our conduct and character mu.st harmonise with our realization. This process of readjustment produces a struggle between the new thought-flow of Self-
realization and the older tendencies. By continuing the sadhanas of sama and <lama, renunciation of desires etc. the jnanin simply tries to remove the obstructions to the manifestation of the effects of the knowledge through his conduct and character, without allowing himself to be overpowered by the old vasanas. Everytime an opposite idea from the store-house of memory invades his con- sciousness, he has only to remember the truth that he has realized. This remembrance will drive away the wrong ideas. Gradually his psycho-physical being will adjust itself to be in harmony with his realization. He has only to surrender himself to the realized truth and allow it to soak into his being; that is all what he has to do. When the readjustment is complete, the jn.anin is said to be a Jivanrnukta or one liberated in life

Those interested might want to read this short and powerful book on Advaita Vedanta — https://selfdefinition.org/advaita/Swami-Iswarananda-God-Realization-Through-Reason.pdf

Edited May 25, 2022 by dwai

[stirling]

On 5/23/2022 at 1:50 PM, Bindi said:

I would suggest because they couldn’t heal themselves, their forms of cultivation don’t confer the ability to heal.

 

The realization of a Karmapa would be that the body wasn't who they were, but instead that what they were was primordial awareness that doesn't depend on a body, or any other illusory construct for its existence. This last bit IS the insight upon realization.

 

[stirling]

On 5/23/2022 at 2:25 PM, Bindi said:

I was re-reading Ramana Maharshi’s body disidentification process (in the spoiler below), he had a thought that he was dying (with absolutely no physical problem), and proceeded to question what this meant and came to the conclusion that even if dead (which he wasn’t) that there was still a sense of me (though he wasn’t dead) therefore the ‘I’ persists beyond the body. It was an exercise of the intellect and imagination.

 

To me this is a very clear account of "awakening". When he says "I" he does not mean his personality, or the separate person he had previously believed himself to be, but rather the awareness that exists underneath the illusory construct of his "self". 

 

He says:

 

Quote

All this was not dull thought; it flashed through me vividly as living truth which I perceived directly, almost without thought process. “I” was something very real, the only real thing about my present state, and all the conscious activity connected with my body was centered on that “I”. From that moment onwards the “I” or Self focused attention on itself by a powerful fascination. Fear of death had vanished once and for all. Absorption in the Self continued unbroken from that time on.”

 

The "Self" and "I" he speaks of ARE this awareness. This is not an intellectual insight. I can understand that you disagree with the idea conceptually, but is this not clear? 

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, stirling said:

 

To me this is a very clear account of "awakening". When he says "I" he does not mean his personality, or the separate person he had previously believed himself to be, but rather the awareness that exists underneath the illusory construct of his "self". 

 

 

That’s what you would like him to be saying, but that’s not what he is saying. He says “But with the death of this body am I dead? Is the body I? It is silent and inert, but I feel the full force of my personality and even the voice of the ‘I’ within me, apart from it. So, I am Spirit transcending the body. The body dies but the Spirit that transcends it cannot be touched by death. That means I am the deathless Spirit.” 
 

My personality and the voice of the I. What does this mean to you?
 

If nothing else he faced his fear of death by acting out his own death, and good on him for that, but there’s more than just the body to disidentify from, there’s still the ‘full force of his personality’ and the egoic “I”. Many layers. 
 

 

 

Quote

 

He says:

 

 

The "Self" and "I" he speaks of ARE this awareness. This is not an intellectual insight. I can understand that you disagree with the idea conceptually, but is this not clear? 

 

[Bindi]

6 hours ago, stirling said:

 

7 Point Mind Training in Tibetan Buddhism is an example of a non-dual "moral" training. Worth investigating if you are open to it.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Great-Path-Awakening-Commentary-Mahayana/dp/0877734208

 

Would I be correct in assuming that non-dual understanding will be a way station in your model of practice?

I would expect Nondual understanding to be one of the perception modes available to me for when that is the most useful mode to employ, but yes just one more way station, just one more mode. My dream of the vine and the structure suggests that this particular mode, the nondual mode, is the hardest to disidentify from, because it can’t actually be distinguished from ego. 

[Giles]

22 hours ago, Apech said:

Why wouldn't it play?

 

Finger problem..?

[Giles]

23 hours ago, Apech said:

My teacher of many years died in 1987 of cancer - and even before that he was semi-paralysed on one side and had other ailments.  He always worked with people and had a large group that he did individual work with and also gave talks and wot not.  I once asked him why he did just become a hermit and use his powers to heal himself.  He thought briefly and said he probably could do that but preferred to work with others.  He kept on to more or less the end when he was basically laid low and then died.  It was a big shock to me because despite everything I had regarded him as virtually immortal.  He certainly didn't 'accept' in the usual sense and took all sorts of measures to prolong his life - as if he kept striking deals with God to say 'keep me going for a bit longer and I'll do this ...'

 

It's partly from him plus my own meagre researches that I came to understand that the work has two main phases - you might say 'seeing it' and then 'being it' ... not that these two are not combined much of the time - but there is one completion which is becoming aware of the nature of things, of the Atman if you like, and a further much longer path which is about completely becoming it i.e. immortal - which is why I say enlightened and immortal.  You can see the essence and the nature of your consciousness but then there is the task of complete integration of all levels of being into it.

 

Perhaps you're overthinking the issue?

 

Spoiler

Before enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water.

 

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Giles said:

 

Perhaps you're overthinking the issue?

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Before enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water.

 

 

Yes, you do the household chores and I'll do the thinking.

[Giles]

15 minutes ago, Apech said:

Yes, you do the household chores and I'll do the thinking.

 

Do you [really] have the patience to wait until your mud settles and the water is clear?

 

~ Lao Tzu ~

 

🤣

[old3bob]

mind stuff can not cross over, it must remain behind.  (for use in its realm thus not destroyed per se.)

[stirling]

6 hours ago, Bindi said:

I would expect Nondual understanding to be one of the perception modes available to me for when that is the most useful mode to employ, but yes just one more way station, just one more mode. My dream of the vine and the structure suggests that this particular mode, the nondual mode, is the hardest to disidentify from, because it can’t actually be distinguished from ego. 

 

My suggestion, since non dual understanding is a necessary step, is to let go of your cognitive dissonance about how it is presented and ideas about how it will or won't be, and make room for it to dawn on you. Once it is an "attainment" for you, you can see what it actually means to your practice and path. Arguing what it is or isn't from a position of avidya is just a waste of time. Your attempts to quantify the understanding, or put it in a box now, will absolutely limit the chance that it will happen at all. You obviously don't want that if this is an important step. 

 

I understand your identification with your dream. I also had many visionary dreams and experiences along the path, and many kept me engaged, so I valued them. My advice is to document them, and notice what they bring up for you in terms of your hopes, but also fears, but ALSO to hold them lightly - don't take them for any kind of absolute reality. Remember your fear of non-duality. It's valuable. Examine carefully what your fear is about, especially what you are afraid of "losing", so that you can examine that fear in the light of understanding and see what it now means in context.

[stirling]

7 hours ago, Bindi said:

That’s what you would like him to be saying, but that’s not what he is saying.

 

I disagree. l appreciate that it is hard to parse if you don't know what you are looking at. While I might use different terms, I completely recognize his description and process. Realizing that what "self" is is not the body is a common way in. Turning the "I" back on itself is a common way to see this. 

 

Quote

From that moment onwards the “I” or Self focussed attention on itself by a powerful fascination. Fear or death had vanished once and for all. Absorption in the Self continued unbroken from that time on. Other thoughts might come and go like the various notes of music, but the “I” continued like the fundamental sruti note that underlies and blends with all the other notes. Whether the body was engaged in talking, reading or anything else, I was still centered on “I”. Previous to that crisis I had no clear perception of my Self and was not consciously attracted to it. I felt no perceptible or direct interest in it, much less any inclination to dwell permanently in it. - Ramana Maharshi

 

Here he describes how what he really is is the awareness that sees the activity of the body and thoughts. Clear non-dual understanding. 

 

Quote

“But with the death of this body am I dead? Is the body I? It is silent and inert, but I feel the full force of my personality and even the voice of the ‘I’ within me, apart from it."

 

See how personality and "I" are two different things? Your personality doesn't GO anywhere, though it changes as insight continues to deepen. In Neo-Advaitic terms you are still (at least initially) the "dream character" in the world who chooses certain foods over others, or has emotions, but the "I" is always seen and understood to be apart from that. 

[manitou]

This think inside us that doesn't move or doesn't she probably doesn't care one whit whether we are in body or out.  Wholely impersonal