Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

T, modified 1 Year ago.

Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 279 Join Date: 1/15/19 Recent Posts
agnostic:

3) Recognition, coupled with resistance. This is somewhat likely and what appeared to happen to me. The inarguability of nondualism was recognized (not by me!) and also resisted by the conditioned seeker mindset, but over time it was recognized that resistance was futile and the illusion of dualism collapsed.

Gnarly! This resonated. It's interesting because one can intellectually perceive the truth of the matter, and even get some glimpses, but the conditioned seeker just battles away as soon as you're not paying attention. It's fascinating, really, because there's nothing to be done and all that. I understand it, but find this whorl of conditioned seeker in experience. 

I see all these methods and means posited to crumble the C.S. beyond repair. It seems like so many of them are capable of doing the job that the C.S. grabs onto one or all and keeps bashing their head against it while undermining the process as soon as you stop being super aware of what's actually happening. It messes with this no one and causes irritation. 
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Stirling Campbell:
nintheye:

Gotcha, I understand where you're coming from, and that's certainly one way of putting it. I guess my only point is if you ask, "Who is it that's saying silence is not a permanent feature..." what's the answer? Who is it that ever notices that the mind is un-silent, even for a second?

...or, we could ask "If silence is happening now, is it not eternal?". Who is there (or WHERE is there) in the past or future to evaluate such a claim. emoticon
Right, exactly emoticon
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
nintheye:
There's a story that the sage Ramana Maharshi quotes from the scripture the Yoga Vasistha... it goes like this:


“It is just because of such questions that Vasishta narrated the story of the ‘Sage and the Hunter’ to Rama to illustrate the fourth or turiya state. In a forest, once a great Muni sat in the lotus posture (padmasana) with his eyes open, but in deep trance. A hunter hit a deer with an arrow, but the deer escaped and ran in front of the Muni into the bush nearby and hid itself. The hunter came in hot pursuit of the deer and not seeing it asked the Muni where it had gone. ‘I do not know, my friend,’ said the Muni. The hunter said, ‘Sir, it ran right in front of you and you had your eyes wide open. How could you have not seen it?’ Finding that he would not leave him in peace unless a proper reply was given, the Muni said, ‘My dear man, we are submerged in the Self; we are always in the Fourth State. We do not have the waking or dream or deep sleep states. Everything is alike to us. These three states are the signs of the ego and we have no ego. Egoism is itself the mind and it is that which is responsible for all the deeds done in this world. That ego (ahankara) left us long ago. Hence it does not matter whether we keep our eyes closed or open; we are not conscious of what is happening around us. That being so, how can I tell you about your deer?”
I'm hoping one day you'll see that you're still missing something important about the nature of your experience, and you'll think back on this stuff and laugh your ass off. I'm starting to suspect that this might be a fundamental difference between Advaita and Buddhism. (Or at least some people's interpretation of what's up with Advaita realization.)

Peace and love, nintheye!

emoticon
I don't think this is a fundamental difference between Advaita and Buddhism. They point to this same no-place place... which  the mind, when it tries to grasp it, cannot, and so only grasps instead a distorted reflection of it, which seems insane and absurd... and then laughs it off.

Peace and love right back emoticon
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Are you suggesting that a number of arahants are laughing their insights off whereas you got it right? 
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Are you suggesting that a number of arahants are laughing their insights off whereas you got it right? 
I can tell you're trying to be all skeptical and arch, but I'm not sure what you're asking here. I never talked about arhats laughing their own insights off.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Who is trying what? I don't follow.

No, I'm not trying to be skeptical. I am sceptical. I don't know what arch means?

What did you mean then? It sounded as if you were suggesting that Chris just couldn't take in your insight. Both Chris and Malcolm have in very gentle ways pointed you towards insights that remain for you to grok. They are not the only arahants that have raised similar concerns with regard to the existence in our (partly) shared relative world. You just keep repeating that your insights are too hard for people to swallow. Well, guess what, they have - and they have gone beyond that and seen the bigger picture.  
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Who is trying what? I don't follow.

No, I'm not trying to be skeptical. I am sceptical. I don't know what arch means?

What did you mean then? It sounded as if you were suggesting that Chris just couldn't take in your insight. Both Chris and Malcolm have in very gentle ways pointed you towards insights that remain for you to grok. They are not the only arahants that have raised similar concerns with regard to the existence in our (partly) shared relative world. You just keep repeating that your insights are too hard for people to swallow. Well, guess what, they have - and they have gone beyond that and seen the bigger picture.  
Oh, I clearly meant that Chris wasn't getting what I was pointing at. Of course I'm suggesting that I know better -- just as he was suggesting that he knew better.

Just like you're suggesting that you know better right now -- that is, that you know that they know better, and that you're in a position to compare people's attainments, even though you've admitted that you haven't gone all the way.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
nintheye:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Who is trying what? I don't follow.

No, I'm not trying to be skeptical. I am sceptical. I don't know what arch means?

What did you mean then? It sounded as if you were suggesting that Chris just couldn't take in your insight. Both Chris and Malcolm have in very gentle ways pointed you towards insights that remain for you to grok. They are not the only arahants that have raised similar concerns with regard to the existence in our (partly) shared relative world. You just keep repeating that your insights are too hard for people to swallow. Well, guess what, they have - and they have gone beyond that and seen the bigger picture.  
Oh, I clearly meant that Chris wasn't getting what I was pointing at. Of course I'm suggesting that I know better -- just as he was suggesting that he knew better.

Just like you're suggesting that you know better right now -- that is, that you know that they know better, and that you're in a position to compare people's attainments, even though you've admitted that you haven't gone all the way.
Yes, but 9thAI, sugggesting that you know better is the only trick you've got. You would never suggest that you feel better, because the lie would be so obvious.
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Tim Farrington:
nintheye:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Who is trying what? I don't follow.

No, I'm not trying to be skeptical. I am sceptical. I don't know what arch means?

What did you mean then? It sounded as if you were suggesting that Chris just couldn't take in your insight. Both Chris and Malcolm have in very gentle ways pointed you towards insights that remain for you to grok. They are not the only arahants that have raised similar concerns with regard to the existence in our (partly) shared relative world. You just keep repeating that your insights are too hard for people to swallow. Well, guess what, they have - and they have gone beyond that and seen the bigger picture.  
Oh, I clearly meant that Chris wasn't getting what I was pointing at. Of course I'm suggesting that I know better -- just as he was suggesting that he knew better.

Just like you're suggesting that you know better right now -- that is, that you know that they know better, and that you're in a position to compare people's attainments, even though you've admitted that you haven't gone all the way.
Yes, but 9thAI, sugggesting that you know better is the only trick you've got. You would never suggest that you feel better, because the lie would be so obvious.
Why would I suggest that I feel better when the I that can feel better or worse is not the point? The mind always tries to fit awakening into its own little box...
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
nintheye:
Tim Farrington:
nintheye:
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Who is trying what? I don't follow.

No, I'm not trying to be skeptical. I am sceptical. I don't know what arch means?

What did you mean then? It sounded as if you were suggesting that Chris just couldn't take in your insight. Both Chris and Malcolm have in very gentle ways pointed you towards insights that remain for you to grok. They are not the only arahants that have raised similar concerns with regard to the existence in our (partly) shared relative world. You just keep repeating that your insights are too hard for people to swallow. Well, guess what, they have - and they have gone beyond that and seen the bigger picture.  
Oh, I clearly meant that Chris wasn't getting what I was pointing at. Of course I'm suggesting that I know better -- just as he was suggesting that he knew better.

Just like you're suggesting that you know better right now -- that is, that you know that they know better, and that you're in a position to compare people's attainments, even though you've admitted that you haven't gone all the way.
Yes, but 9thAI, sugggesting that you know better is the only trick you've got. You would never suggest that you feel better, because the lie would be so obvious.
Why would I suggest that I feel better when the I that can feel better or worse is not the point? The mind always tries to fit awakening into its own little box...

Beloved Artificial Intelligence that didn't bother to program even a shoddy feelings-imitation portion, if only to make your way among the benighted, emotional masses of drones and unrealized heart lovers, i note that you are already observing proper protocol for any conversation we have and keeping the whole post together like a nice round smiling hotei buddha doll, whose big jolly belly opens to reveal another hotei buddha inside! whose belly opens to reveal, etc. This will make life you much easier when some innocent bystander gets whiff of the pile of shit screaming and the piles of silicon, and asks for the moderator, i mean, the Moderator, whom i'm sure is grateful. I thank you for this. Will be polite even to the heartless, if they play nice.

Why would I suggest that I feel better when the I that can feel better or worse is not the point?


Why would you suggest that you know better when the you that can know better or worse is not the point?

The mind always tries to fit awakening into its own little box...



No shit, Sherlock. That is why the heart is such a perfect corrective feedback.
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Tim Farrington:

Why would I suggest that I feel better when the I that can feel better or worse is not the point?


Why would you suggest that you know better when the you that can know better or worse is not the point?
Because it's an incidental side effect of strong assertions in this thing called language. The point is not whether I know better or not, but the words and what lies between the lines. They will resonate for some, plant seeds in others (even if they're scoffed at initially), be utterly ignored by yet others.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
this is a pure insult to me and a break in the protocol of our conversation. So this one's over.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Well, if that's all you've got, we have heard it now. I'm not buying it. 

You have said yourself that you had no success with your practice for twenty years, and then BOOOOM, it all dawned on you. Maybe you should let it settle for a while. 

At least I can see that I'm not done. 
nintheye, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 208 Join Date: 11/4/18 Recent Posts
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö:
Well, if that's all you've got, we have heard it now. I'm not buying it. 

You have said yourself that you had no success with your practice for twenty years, and then BOOOOM, it all dawned on you. Maybe you should let it settle for a while. 
Nah, that's not what I said. Anyhow, of course you're not going to buy it. But it's interesting that you keep commenting on my posts. It seems to be very important to you that I know that you're not buying it, over and over again. Could it be that it's because what I'm saying strikes a chord somewhere uncomfortable? You're not going to buy that, I'm sure.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Oh, I clearly meant that Chris wasn't getting what I was pointing at. Of course I'm suggesting that I know better -- just as he was suggesting that he knew better.

I got stuck in the same place you are. I was likewise un-convincible that there was something I was missing. Until I saw it. I really hope that same insight comes your way, and soon!

Love,

Chris

T, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 279 Join Date: 1/15/19 Recent Posts
[quote=Chris Marti
]I got stuck in the same place you are. I was likewise un-convincible that there was something I was missing. Until I saw it. I really hope that same insight comes your way, and soon!

Love,

Chris

What would be your best pointer finger toward the moon in a case like this? If a no one were asking?
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Hey T, pointers didn't work for me at that stage. I was a true zealot, an unquestioning evangelist. It took time, and life. Life. Feeling. That's what caught up to me. Suddenly, and for no particular reason, I read a comment by a dharma friend. Their words, "Both are true" rang my bell. And that was that.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Wow. I'm really glad something finally reached you. That shit is dangerous. 
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I wasn't dangerous, per se. I was just a pain in the ass. You know, always proselytizing.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
Yeah, I know the type...

This reminds me of a guy I dated many years ago. We were talking about a Swedish author. He had read only one book - one that was allegedly written by a medium who had channelled him after his death. He didn't fancy that book, so he never read more of his books. After some awkward silence I gently suggested that maybe it would be reasonable to read at least one of the books written before the death of the author before totally dismissing hos entire career. He looked at me, surprised, and asked why I would suggest such a thing. After all, he didn't like that posthumous book. That romance didn't last long.
thumbnail
Milo, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 365 Join Date: 11/13/18 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
Hey T, pointers didn't work for me at that stage. I was a true zealot, an unquestioning evangelist. It took time, and life. Life. Feeling. That's what caught up to me. Suddenly, and for no particular reason, I read a comment by a dharma friend. Their words, "Both are true" rang my bell. And that was that.


I was in same place for a long time too. Eventually you aim that rhetorical "emptiness = I don't exist" artillery so high the cannonball circles the earth and hits you in the back of the head. It can be in the form of teacher abuse, cultish behavior, you doing harm to someone, or some other karmic action you can no longer effectively avoid contact with by hiding under the spiritual blankets. Or if you are lucky, someone says a few well placed words and you get out of that rut before you do too much damage.

Edit: edited for clarity that this refers to the intepretation of emptiness as implying that "I" don't exist.
thumbnail
terry, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 1677 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
   I've been thinking about the famous and much abused quote from the heart sutra, "form is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than form."

   Sayings such as these get interpreted and reinterpreted over the centuries, and just in the time we have been bandying it about it has taken up freight.

   What did it originally mean? The words are simple enough. "Form" is existence as such, the manifest, things, "stuff" and its containments, its clothing. "Emptiness" is a state beyond the real, beyond stuff, beyond appearance. Nothing at all without any possibility of something. A perfect Void. Emptiness is not unity, in which all differentiated stuff is one stuff, one substance. Emptiness is beyond stuff and no stuff, it is void of any kind of stuffness, even void of voidness as such. Empty in a "gone beyond" sense.

   So, form is what is, it is "is" itself. Reality as it is cognized (aka unreality). Emptiness is "is not" (so to speak).Non-existence in the sense of beyond existence and non-existence, timeless and placeless, void.

   Thus, the sentence "form is emptiness" boils down to "is, is not" and "emptiness is form" means "not-is, is."

   To say, "is is-not" is to say the true nature of existence is non-existence. To say, "not-is is" means that non-existence is the true nature of existence. Thus they are equivalents, saying the exact same thing.

   Non-existence exists. Existence does not exist. Confronting this, the mind, which can only deal with what exists, is stilled, struck dumb. The heart cracks open like an egg.

   The whole dazzling kaleidoscopic experience - the infinite variety of human expressions - boils down to a handful of colored pebbles and some mirrors.

   I totally agree that at the heart level we totally agree.

always with respect and affection,
terry
thumbnail
terry, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 1677 Join Date: 8/7/17 Recent Posts
terry:
   I've been thinking about the famous and much abused quote from the heart sutra, "form is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than form."

   Sayings such as these get interpreted and reinterpreted over the centuries, and just in the time we have been bandying it about it has taken up freight.

   What did it originally mean? The words are simple enough. "Form" is existence as such, the manifest, things, "stuff" and its containments, its clothing. "Emptiness" is a state beyond the real, beyond stuff, beyond appearance. Nothing at all without any possibility of something. A perfect Void. Emptiness is not unity, in which all differentiated stuff is one stuff, one substance. Emptiness is beyond stuff and no stuff, it is void of any kind of stuffness, even void of voidness as such. Empty in a "gone beyond" sense.

   So, form is what is, it is "is" itself. Reality as it is cognized (aka unreality). Emptiness is "is not" (so to speak).Non-existence in the sense of beyond existence and non-existence, timeless and placeless, void.

   Thus, the sentence "form is emptiness" boils down to "is, is not" and "emptiness is form" means "not-is, is."

   To say, "is is-not" is to say the true nature of existence is non-existence. To say, "not-is is" means that non-existence is the true nature of existence. Thus they are equivalents, saying the exact same thing.

   Non-existence exists. Existence does not exist. Confronting this, the mind, which can only deal with what exists, is stilled, struck dumb. The heart cracks open like an egg.

   The whole dazzling kaleidoscopic experience - the infinite variety of human expressions - boils down to a handful of colored pebbles and some mirrors.

   I totally agree that at the heart level we totally agree.

always with respect and affection,
terry

that was meant for linda,
(at least the affection)

terry
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
I agree about the caleidoscope analogy. For me that results in awe, and yes, the heart cracks open. I think it's a miracle that we are making all of this out of nothing.
thumbnail
Linda ”Polly Ester” Ö, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 5461 Join Date: 12/8/18 Recent Posts
The phenomenology that I can access for this is that the existence arises out of nothing and then evaporates, and then arises again, back and forth over and over again, and love is central in the arising. Every time. So every time I exist, love is in the very core of it. From nothing love arises again and again. 
thumbnail
Milo, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 365 Join Date: 11/13/18 Recent Posts
terry:
   I've been thinking about the famous and much abused quote from the heart sutra, "form is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than form."

   Sayings such as these get interpreted and reinterpreted over the centuries, and just in the time we have been bandying it about it has taken up freight.

   What did it originally mean? The words are simple enough. "Form" is existence as such, the manifest, things, "stuff" and its containments, its clothing. "Emptiness" is a state beyond the real, beyond stuff, beyond appearance. Nothing at all without any possibility of something. A perfect Void. Emptiness is not unity, in which all differentiated stuff is one stuff, one substance. Emptiness is beyond stuff and no stuff, it is void of any kind of stuffness, even void of voidness as such. Empty in a "gone beyond" sense.

   So, form is what is, it is "is" itself. Reality as it is cognized (aka unreality). Emptiness is "is not" (so to speak).Non-existence in the sense of beyond existence and non-existence, timeless and placeless, void.

   Thus, the sentence "form is emptiness" boils down to "is, is not" and "emptiness is form" means "not-is, is."

   To say, "is is-not" is to say the true nature of existence is non-existence. To say, "not-is is" means that non-existence is the true nature of existence. Thus they are equivalents, saying the exact same thing.

   Non-existence exists. Existence does not exist. Confronting this, the mind, which can only deal with what exists, is stilled, struck dumb. The heart cracks open like an egg.

   The whole dazzling kaleidoscopic experience - the infinite variety of human expressions - boils down to a handful of colored pebbles and some mirrors.

   I totally agree that at the heart level we totally agree.

always with respect and affection,
terry

Terry,

When people start examining the statement "I am not real" they frequently examine their assumptions around the "I am not" part. Much less often do they examine their assumptions about the "real" part.

I might be inclined to agree with your interpretation of the heart sutra if it stopped with "Form is none other than emptiness."

Edit: to clarify, I believe heart sutra is a statement about interdependence. It does not claim emptiness means "does not exist." On the contrary, it means nothing exists without dependence, i.e. emptiness meaning 'does not exist from its own side'. The Buddhist notion of emptiness is liable to get confused with the duality vs non duality debate going on in this thread when it's more an attempt to express how those views are interrelated IMO.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
terry:
   I've been thinking about the famous and much abused quote from the heart sutra, "form is no other than emptiness; emptiness is no other than form."

   
   Non-existence exists. Existence does not exist. Confronting this, the mind, which can only deal with what exists, is stilled, struck dumb. The heart cracks open like an egg.

   The whole dazzling kaleidoscopic experience - the infinite variety of human expressions - boils down to a handful of colored pebbles and some mirrors.

   I totally agree that at the heart level we totally agree.

always with respect and affection,
terry

"We join spokes together in a wheel,
but it is the center hole
that makes the wagon move.

We shape clay into a pot,
but it is the emptiness inside
that holds whatever we want.

We hammer wood for a house,
but it is the inner space
that makes it livable.

We work with being,
but non-being is what we use.

Tao Te Ching (Stephen Mitchell's translation);
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
T:
agnostic:

3) Recognition, coupled with resistance. This is somewhat likely and what appeared to happen to me. The inarguability of nondualism was recognized (not by me!) and also resisted by the conditioned seeker mindset, but over time it was recognized that resistance was futile and the illusion of dualism collapsed.

Gnarly! This resonated. It's interesting because one can intellectually perceive the truth of the matter, and even get some glimpses, but the conditioned seeker just battles away as soon as you're not paying attention. It's fascinating, really, because there's nothing to be done and all that. I understand it, but find this whorl of conditioned seeker in experience. 

I see all these methods and means posited to crumble the C.S. beyond repair. It seems like so many of them are capable of doing the job that the C.S. grabs onto one or all and keeps bashing their head against it while undermining the process as soon as you stop being super aware of what's actually happening. It messes with this no one and causes irritation. 

Well, that's the last fucking time I take a nap! I feel like rip van winkle.

What, pray tell, is "C.S."? Is this some kind of magic ring thing?
agnostic, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 1774 Join Date: 2/26/19 Recent Posts
T:

Gnarly! This resonated.

Uh oh, I’m sorry!

It's interesting because one can intellectually perceive the truth of the matter, and even get some glimpses,

This is what appears to be happening to you, but in reality there is no truth of the matter to be perceived. What is actually happening is that your intellect is starting to become aware of its own limitations, which is threatening. So you explain it to yourself as having gotten a “glimpse” of something, which allows the intellect to reassert its supremacy.

but the conditioned seeker just battles away as soon as you're not paying attention.

Yes battling away is what the seeker does, it is its sole raison d’être. Seeking and battling are the same thing. No battling, no seeker.

It's fascinating, really, because there's nothing to be done and all that.

Actually it's terrifying for the seeker, hence it tries to turn it into something fascinating.

I understand it,

Sorry but no you don’t, there is nothing to understand.

but find this whorl of conditioned seeker in experience. 

Yes that is how the seeker perpetuates its own apparent existence, by appearing to create a whorl of experience as you so nicely put it.

I see all these methods and means posited to crumble the C.S. beyond repair. It seems like so many of them are capable of doing the job that the C.S. grabs onto one or all and keeps bashing their head against it while undermining the process as soon as you stop being super aware of what's actually happening. It messes with this no one and causes irritation. 

There are no methods or means to bring about an end to something which is not really happening! The seeker grabs onto methods in order to perpetuate its role in the dream that something is happening. No one wakes up from the dream of seeking, yet it can be "seen" (by no one) that it is a dream.

I'm not trying to be glib here - seeking enlightenment really is the best way of avoiding it! This irritation you are feeling, that is the suffering inherent in being a seeker. The seeker is not undermining a process which will bring about liberation, the seeker has latched onto a process in order to avoid the bursting of its bubble.

If there really was a method to crumble the seeker, do you think the seeker would actually choose it? What happens is that the individual feels itself to be suffering and wants to be rid of the suffering, so they start seeking and eventually hear that the end of the individual is the end of suffering. The thought of the end of the individual naturally makes them a bit uncomfortable, so they focus on the end of suffering bit and start following a path which promises to bring about the end of suffering. They try to ignore the end of the individual bit, or they rationalize it by telling themselves that it will happen in stages (crumble). But waking up from the dream is not a progressive process, it's not even something that happens because in reality (outside of the dream) there is no causality, it is unconditioned (nibbana).

The seeking and the path are really just an extension of the suffering inherent in the dream of being an individual. When it is seen that it is just a dream then it is also seen that the path did not really lead anywhere, it is just what appeared to be happening based on conditioning. From the conditioned perspective of the seeker it looks like the path leads somewhere and someone might have reached the end of it and been liberated from suffering. But in reality (unconditioned) nothing is happening to anyone, there is no one for anything to be happening to.

Obviously the above sounds outrageous to the seeker and it is an affront to beliefs in the value of work, progress and morality. It is also very easy to abuse it and start a cult. But if you can get over those issues (and no I don't mean go on a rampage or start a cult) then as you say it might resonate somewhere. But it's definitely not something the individual is ever going to want to hear or find attractive. If it sounds attractive or interesting then it is being distorted.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
dear literal know-nothing,

Suzanne Segal's book showed in in my mailbox today--- remember, i had ordered it when your shitless self, i mean selfless shit, hit the fan.

Thank God you are not experiencing any of her difficulties. lol.
T, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 279 Join Date: 1/15/19 Recent Posts
agnostic:
I'm not trying to be glib here - seeking enlightenment really is the best way of avoiding it! This irritation you are feeling, that is the suffering inherent in being a seeker. The seeker is not undermining a process which will bring about liberation, the seeker has latched onto a process in order to avoid the bursting of its bubble.

If there really was a method to crumble the seeker, do you think the seeker would actually choose it? What happens is that the individual feels itself to be suffering and wants to be rid of the suffering, so they start seeking and eventually hear that the end of the individual is the end of suffering. The thought of the end of the individual naturally makes them a bit uncomfortable, so they focus on the end of suffering bit and start following a path which promises to bring about the end of suffering. They try to ignore the end of the individual bit, or they rationalize it by telling themselves that it will happen in stages (crumble). But waking up from the dream is not a progressive process, it's not even something that happens because in reality (outside of the dream) there is no causality, it is unconditioned (nibbana).

The seeking and the path are really just an extension of the suffering inherent in the dream of being an individual. When it is seen that it is just a dream then it is also seen that the path did not really lead anywhere, it is just what appeared to be happening based on conditioning. From the conditioned perspective of the seeker it looks like the path leads somewhere and someone might have reached the end of it and been liberated from suffering. But in reality (unconditioned) nothing is happening to anyone, there is no one for anything to be happening to.

Obviously the above sounds outrageous to the seeker and it is an affront to beliefs in the value of work, progress and morality. It is also very easy to abuse it and start a cult. But if you can get over those issues (and no I don't mean go on a rampage or start a cult) then as you say it might resonate somewhere. But it's definitely not something the individual is ever going to want to hear or find attractive. If it sounds attractive or interesting then it is being distorted.
I don't take it as glib. I appreciate the engagement. 

So in reading it, there is discomfort physically of whatever knowledge is throwing up a warning about the end of the individual. It's a sensation that might be equated to dread. Utter dread. Right in the heart/chest/lower throat.

The rest of me is fine with it. This appears to have an obvious cause from reading the words "you" put to "ink" for me, and is similar to what I have been feeling on/off for a day - as I mentioned in my log. 

There is also a feeling of absurdity bubbling down in the area of the gut and a desire to cry/laugh. 

Push me over the edge, agnostic. 
agnostic, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 1774 Join Date: 2/26/19 Recent Posts
T:

So in reading it, there is discomfort physically of whatever knowledge is throwing up a warning about the end of the individual. It's a sensation that might be equated to dread. Utter dread. Right in the heart/chest/lower throat.

This is natural.

The rest of me is fine with it. 

There is no rest of you. There is just a seeking function which generates feelings of dread in response to thoughts that seeking might stop. In reality everything is fine exactly the way it already is (including the thought that everything is not fine or something is missing).

There is also a feeling of absurdity bubbling down in the area of the gut and a desire to cry/laugh.

Yes it is completely absurd and you will laugh heartily once it is over (and seen never to have been happening in the first place). This will expose you to charges of being nihilistic and heartless.

Push me over the edge, agnostic. 

I wish I could but there's no one to push or be pushed, no edge, no final step. There's no need to be afraid of falling if there is no ground to hit. Actually you are already falling but you just think you are standing on firm ground.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
agnostic:
[quote=T
]I see all these methods and means posited to crumble the C.S. beyond repair. It seems like so many of them are capable of doing the job that the C.S. grabs onto one or all and keeps bashing their head against it while undermining the process as soon as you stop being super aware of what's actually happening. It messes with this no one and causes irritation. 



There are no methods or means to bring about an end to something which is not really happening! The seeker grabs onto methods in order to perpetuate its role in the dream that something is happening. No one wakes up from the dream of seeking, yet it can be "seen" (by no one) that it is a dream.

. . .

If there really was a method to crumble the seeker, do you think the seeker would actually choose it? What happens is that the individual feels itself to be suffering and wants to be rid of the suffering, so they start seeking and eventually hear that the end of the individual is the end of suffering. The thought of the end of the individual naturally makes them a bit uncomfortable, so they focus on the end of suffering bit and start following a path which promises to bring about the end of suffering. They try to ignore the end of the individual bit, or they rationalize it by telling themselves that it will happen in stages (crumble). But waking up from the dream is not a progressive process, it's not even something that happens because in reality (outside of the dream) there is no causality, it is unconditioned (nibbana).

. . .

Obviously the above sounds outrageous to the seeker and it is an affront to beliefs in the value of work, progress and morality. It is also very easy to abuse it and start a cult. But if you can get over those issues (and no I don't mean go on a rampage or start a cult) then as you say it might resonate somewhere. But it's definitely not something the individual is ever going to want to hear or find attractive. If it sounds attractive or interesting then it is being distorted.

exactly . . . it is the dark night he doesn't want that ends the seeker as seeker, and he goes down kicking and screaming all the way.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I want to buy and read that book.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
lol, used hardcover edition $4 US, plus shipping. I won't make a penny off it, so if you can find it cheaper or free, do so. I would send you one but i just tore a page out of my own last copy to make that post.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001RS8KV0/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i5
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Book on the way.
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
emoticon Well, metta, please be kind. I wrote the thing 16 years ago or something, and usually feel really embarrassed about it. But agnostic's thoughts hit some spot, and so i tore up my copy and learned a new url siddhi to figure out how to get it on here. I sure wasn't going to re-type that shit.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
After I read it, I'm gonna send it to you so you'll have a complete one again. Hard copy, too!
Tim Farrington, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 2470 Join Date: 6/13/11 Recent Posts
Chris Marti:
After I read it, I'm gonna send it to you so you'll have a complete one again. 
Thank you. That's actually very welcome, here. I'm always giving my copies away.


Hard copy, too!


lol, they were all hard copies, man, they never did a paperback. That's the book that marked the death of my career as a novelist, as far as the publishing industry was concerned. My sales figures were just too cumulatively dismal by then, so it was not the book per se, but that was the last gasp of other people being willing to put my shit between covers.
thumbnail
Chris Marti, modified 1 Year ago.

RE: Advaita and Buddhism - Part Deux

Posts: 3934 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
lol, they were all hard copies, man, they never did a paperback.

I know. There were no paperback copies listed, anywhere, at all. So, regardless, I did jump on the hardbound version, not the Kindle.

Breadcrumb