Message Boards Message Boards

Claims to Attainments

The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs

Toggle
The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs
Answer
3/13/20 4:16 AM
The long dead Siddhartha was simply a genius. He discovered that two illusions cause real (?) suffering:

1. The illusion of solidity,
2. The illusion of separateness.

He also discovered the remedy:
Maintaining a Loving Alertness for longer & longer periods of time until solidity melts & Reality appears in its glorious fluidity. Somewhere along the line, if one hugs Reality closely enough, separateness vanishes also. And one day Suffering becomes irrelevant.

Of course life continues...
One has ups & downs. The body fails slowly bit by bit if one is lucky (and careful) or more suddenly if one is not lucky (or reckless). The mind also continues to do its thing with moments of joy & even more moments of sorrow. All this depending on causes and conditions. But it is no longer problematic.

So, as he said, practice with heedfulness.

Nota:
The above is a claim of understanding but not of attainment.

RE: The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs
Answer
3/13/20 8:31 AM as a reply to Todo.
Todo:


Maintaining a Loving Alertness for longer & longer periods of time..


emoticon

RE: The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs
Answer
3/13/20 8:48 AM as a reply to Todo.
Yes. Many years ago I picked up the habit (from a fictional novel) to say a little prayer for any dead little animal I saw on the ground. However, in saying the prayer, the absurdity of it stood out, because that dead body was an entire realm for beings that were very much alive. Who am I to say that they don't count? Where should I draw the line? Even if I were a strict materialist - which I'm not at all - separation is dependent on scale, among many other things. Just with a handshake we exchange countless whole civilizations. 

Loving alertness - I like that.

RE: The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs
Answer
3/13/20 1:00 PM as a reply to Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö.
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Yes. Many years ago I picked up the habit (from a fictional novel) to say a little prayer for any dead little animal I saw on the ground. However, in saying the prayer, the absurdity of it stood out, because that dead body was an entire realm for beings that were very much alive. Who am I to say that they don't count? Where should I draw the line? Even if I were a strict materialist - which I'm not at all - separation is dependent on scale, among many other things. Just with a handshake we exchange countless whole civilizations. 

Loving alertness - I like that.


Actually the term similar to that, is "Loving Awareness", from Ram Dass. His definition for Mindfulness, that Jack Kornfield uses too.

RE: The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs
Answer
3/13/20 1:05 PM as a reply to Siavash.
I had already heard that term, although I didn't know from where it came originally. I liked this phrasing because it resonated with something a bit differently, but which pointer works best may vary, I think. 

RE: The 4 N.T. explained with 3 Cs
Answer
3/15/20 3:08 AM as a reply to Todo.
Todo:
Maintaining a Loving Alertness for longer & longer periods of time

This sounds like generally great idea emoticon

until solidity melts & Reality appears in its glorious fluidity.

So you (or Siddhartha) claim this "practice" increases ability of senses to perceive fluidity of movement/changes?

Last year I discovered that decreasing some frequency in my brain my vision become much more fluid. I would then see every movement and not only sight but all senses. It seems it made brain integrate experience of changes into consciuous experience of senses which otherwise was for me pretty much non-existent. Sure I normally know something is moving but having experinced more fluid perception I must say that normally my senses just take still frames and actual experience of change from one frame to another is not generated. Perhaps such downclocking of brain gives it slightly more time to process sensual stimuli (or rather parts of brain which generate conscious experience of senses) and normally signals just cannot keep up without desynchronizing whole perception (it would not be good if perception of change was not perfectly synchronized with perception of content) and whole signal path is disabled. It might also happen just to conserve power though I think the main reason is long processing time it takes to generate perception of change. It is like when designing circuits in FPGA, when two parts of model have different processing times (signal propagation) and you need them to happen on the same clock cycle you will be limited to lower clock period time of slower part. Also the opposite operation of increasing this clock is possible but it does not feel very nice as it produces strange trailing smudges after moving objects suggesting parts of brain which process senses are not properly initialized before they start processing new inputs and signals from old position and new are mixed up.

Love generally is on lower end of the scale when it comes to frequency so this might be why cultivating love is producing the similar/same effect.