Death, Consciousness, Nondual Perception
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Buddhism in fact increases your awareness of what's right or wrong.
No, Buddhism brings you far far away from the reality of what's right and wrong. -
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
No, Buddhism brings you far far away from the reality of what's right and wrong.You obviously know nothing about Buddhism.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Have you ever had the experience of fully appreciating a piece of music to the point that instead of 'hearing' the music, you actually 'Became' the music? It's like your sense of self or personality temporarily dissolves and instead of hearing the music, you are the music as it plays?
Or perhaps seeing a tree.. or anything... and becoming merged with the seeing or the tree such that you could feel the 'existence' of the tree itself, but there is nobody there seeing it... you are not there seeing the tree, you ARE the tree, you ARE the seeing/seen.
Well I had such experiences years ago but recently I had more intense experiences of such....
Some days back I was contemplating on death. What I mean is I'm pondering on 'How does it feel like to die or be dead?'... Then I 'pretended' to die... and suddenly, it feels like "I" completely died and disappeared.. But instead of losing consciousness, awareness turns out to be everything I see and felt, the whole world is there, except without a "me". It's like the pure existence of the world but without a center or a "me" in it. However a short moment later the karmic propensity of perceiving a "separate self" comes back like an entity in the head and 'I' 'lost' the experience... This is described very precisely by Thusness in his earlier stages of experiences, "The rest of the journey is the unfolding and further refining of this experience of Total Presence but somehow there is always this blockage, this ‘something’ preventing me from recapturing the experience. It is the inability to fully ‘die’ into total Presence..." and "Somehow something is blocking the natural flow of my innermost essence and preventing me from re-living the experience. Presence is still there but there is no sense of ‘totality’. It was both logically and intuitively clear that ‘I’ is the problem. It is the ‘I’ that is blocking; it is the ‘I’ that is the limit; it is the ‘I’ that is the boundary but why can’t I do away with it?"
Anyway I learnt from this that 'death' is not as scary as we might think and in fact is quite blissful.
Then a few days later a similar experience came but was much more intense... it feels as though I'm entering into a different state of consciousness... and my body and mind is like totally dissolving and fading away... and I'm 'forcefully' absorbed into what I am seeing and hearing and feeling... it feels strange and I don't know how to describe it. There is sort of a shift in consciousness like entering an altered state but yet it is not a trance. There is complete awareness or consciousness but the "self" or "center" dissolves and fades out of existence. What remains is everything as consciousness. Actually it's not even "consciousness" that we might think of or "consciousness" in the Buddhist sense because this "consciousness" is not "consciousness conscious OF something"... rather it feels like pure existence itself… the "Pure Beingness", yet not limited to the sense of "Beingness" or "Amness" (which I had past glimpses of what it is like, the impersonal pure sense of existence or consciousness) but rather it is the "pure existence" of the seeing and hearing, i.e. of the "world".
It feels very different from our normal way of perceiving things but at the same time it's pretty much the same. What I mean is the things that are seen or heard are still pretty much the same as before but the experience contrasts with our normal (or abnormal) way of perceiving things "at a distance" and "with a self" and also with a lack of clarity.
This time the experience is longer but still I 'went back to normal' after some time. Also, it appears that I 'time travelled' during my meditation... I sat one hour, second half hour passed by like less than a few minutes... its as if I did not perceive the change in time.. sort of timeless? I only knew how long has past after looking at the clock.
Anyone had such experiences to share?
p.s. the forum seems unusually inactive theseadays.
Great explanation by David Loy which I just read (I find some parts of his book 'Nonduality' intellectually heavy and couldn't fully understand but at the same time I could recognise increasingly what he is saying):
To begin, let us remind ourselves that in nondual perception there is no awareness that one is seeing with the eyes or hearing with the ears. According to the ninth Oxherding Picture, the perceiving of an enlightened person is "as though he were blind and deaf" in the sense that "he absorbs himself so unselfconsciously in what he sees and hears that his seeing is no seeing and his hearing no-hearing." To be simultaneously aware of the sense-organ would mean that attention is divided, hence the experience is dualistic and the Light-object (for example) could not be completely be self-luminous. This view is equally agreeable to both Mahayana and Advaita, but Advaita quite understandably wants to distinguish between such transcendental experience and our usual perception, in which sense-consciousness is dependent upon the contact between organ and object. But the only way we can avoid splitting experience into two radically different types, thus severing samsara from nirvana, is to make the extraordinary claim that we do not actually perceive with the sense-organs even now.
-
BTW while trying to find 'where is the body' one finds that there is no body in one's direct experience, only bodily sensations etc. The construct of a body is 'inferred'. It is only a mental construct which we are heavily bonded with.
As David Loy also said (regarding the duality between sense organ and sense object), "However deeply automatized such a basic inference may be, still it is nothing more than a savikalpa thought-construct. This argument also implies something else important to the nondualist: that we have never had any dualistic sense-experience. The sense of duality can only be thought-constructed by juxtaposing one nondual experience (e.g., an eye opening) with another (the experience of a self-luminous Light-object.)"
And hence in deep meditation we can dissolve such bonds and 'body consciousness'... Saw something from the net the other day which I think is very nicely described...
"Your movement of thought interferes with the process of touch, just as it does with the other senses. Anything you touch is always translated as 'hard', 'soft', 'warm', 'cold', 'wet', 'dry', and so on.
You do not realize it, but it is your thinking that creates your own body. Without this thought process there is no body consciousness -- which is to say there is no body at all. My body exists for other people; it does not exist for me; there are only isolated points of contact, impulses of touch which are not tied together by thought. So the body is not different from the objects around it; it is a set of sensations like any others. Your body does not belong to you.
Perhaps I can give you the 'feel' of this. I sleep four hours at night, no matter what time I go to bed. Then I lie in bed until morning fully awake. I don't know what is lying there in the bed; I don't know whether I'm lying on my left side or my right side -- for hours and hours I lie like this. If there is any noise outside -- a bird or something -- it just echoes in me. I listen to the "flub-dub-flub-dub" of my heart and don't know what it is. There is no body between the two sheets -- the form of the body is not there. If the question is asked, "What is in there?" there is only an awareness of the points of contact, where the body is in contact with the bed and the sheets, and where it is in contact with itself, at the crossing of the legs, for example. There are only the sensations of touch from these points of contact, and the rest of the body is not there. There is some kind of heaviness, probably the gravitational pull, something very vague. There is nothing inside which links up these things. Even if the eyes are open and looking at the whole body, there are still only the points of contact, and they have no connection with what I am looking at. If I want to try to link up these points of contact into the shape of my own body, probably I will succeed, but by the time it is completed the body is back in the same situation of different points of contact. The linkage cannot stay. It is the same sort of thing when I'm sitting or standing. There is no body.
Can you tell me how mango juice tastes? I can't. You also cannot; but you try to relive the memory of mango juice now -- you create for yourself some kind of an experience of how it tastes -- which I cannot do. I must have mango juice on my tongue -- seeing or smelling it is not enough -- in order to be able to bring that past knowledge into operation and to say "Yes, this is what mango juice tastes like." This does not mean that personal preferences and 'tastes' change. In a market my hand automatically reaches out for the same items that I have liked all my life. But because I cannot conjure up a mental experience, there can be no craving for foods which are not there.
Smell plays a greater part in your daily life than does taste. The olfactory organs are constantly open to odors. But if you do not interfere with the sense of smell, what is there is only an irritation in the nose. It makes no difference whether you are smelling cow dung or an expensive French perfume -- you rub the nose and move on."
-
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
No, Buddhism brings you far far away from the reality of what's right and wrong.
i think u r right somehow ,because buddhism provide morality above reality. In reality ,ppl chasing money,gals, this only bring u short period of happness ,but buddha 's teaching bring u ultimate happniess ,ppl name that enlightment.In reality u have many delusion which causes unhappiness. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Anyway I learnt from this that 'death' is not as scary as we might think and in fact is quite blissful.
AEN I have a question. If "death" is quite blissful, why do we hear numerous cases of recently deceased suffering extreme disorientation due to the sudden loss of the "I", "me" and "my body" focal point? Has it anything to do with the earthly remains of the deceased being touched or disturbed? -
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
AEN I have a question. If "death" is quite blissful, why do we hear numerous cases of recently deceased suffering extreme disorientation due to the sudden loss of the "I", "me" and "my body" focal point? Has it anything to do with the earthly remains of the deceased being touched or disturbed?I'm not sure what sort of disorientation. Even if there is disorientation (and I don't know what you mean by this), there will be tremendous bliss resulting from the loss of 'I', 'me', 'mine'. If there is no bliss, that means there is still attachment to 'self'. Also how do you know that he is feeling disoriented if he's already dead? lol
Also after death, the loss of 'I', 'me', 'my body' is only for a short moment. When complete dissolution happens there is a short moment where the Clear Light is experienced, which is our true nature. But most people cannot recognise that, and the delusion of 'I', 'me', 'mine' or 'where am I?' arises again and hence the state is lost and rebirth takes place. In Mahayana or Vajrayana, the delusional 'I', 'me', 'mine' which is the 7th consciousness results in the formation of the Antarabhava in the bardo state, which is a ghost-like entity being the height of a 5 year old. During the beginning period the Antarabhava will suffer some confusion.
BTW recently I watched this youtube video, I could recognise what she is saying. It's very good, do watch it if you can. I believe she had an awakening of some sort. Luckily my experience wasn't stroke... lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU
Full transcript:
http://blog.ted.com/2008/03/jill_bolte_tayl.phpI grew up to study the brain because I have a brother who has been diagnosed with a brain disorder, schizophrenia. And as a sister and as a scientist, I wanted to understand, why is it that I can take my dreams, I can connect them to my reality, and I can make my dreams come true -- what is it about my brother's brain and his schizophrenia that he cannot connect his dreams to a common, shared reality, so they instead become delusions?
So I dedicated my career to research into the severe mental illnesses. And I moved from my home state of Indiana to Boston where I was working in the lab of Dr. Francine Benes, in the Harvard Department of Psychiatry. And in the lab, we were asking the question, What are the biological differences between the brains of individuals who would be diagnosed as normal control, as compared to the brains of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or bipolar disorder?
So we were essentially mapping the microcircuitry of the brain, which cells are communicating with which cells, with which chemicals, and then with what quantities of those chemicals. So there was a lot of meaning in my life because I was performing this kind of research during the day. But then in the evenings and on the weekends I traveled as an advocate for NAMI, the National Alliance on Mental Illness.
But on the morning of December 10 1996 I woke up to discover that I had a brain disorder of my own. A blood vessel exploded in the left half of my brain. And in the course of four hours I watched my brain completely deteriorate in its ability to process all information. On the morning of the hemorrhage I could not walk, talk, read, write or recall any of my life. I essentially became an infant in a woman's body.
If you've ever seen a human brain, it's obvious that the two hemispheres are completely separate from one another. And I have brought for you a real human brain. [Thanks.] So, this is a real human brain. This is the front of the brain, the back of the brain with a spinal cord hanging down, and this is how it would be positioned inside of my head. And when you look at the brain, it's obvious that the two cerebral cortices are completely separate from one another. For those of you who understand computers, our right hemisphere functions like a parallel processor. While our left hemisphere functions like a serial processor. The two hemispheres do communicate with one another through the corpus collosum, which is made up of some 300 million axonal fibers. But other than that, the two hemispheres are completely separate. Because they process information differently, each hemisphere thinks about different things, they care about different things, and dare I say, they have very different personalities. [Excuse me. Thank you. It's been a joy.]
Our right hemisphere is all about this present moment. It's all about right here right now. Our right hemisphere, it thinks in pictures and it learns kinesthetically through the movement of our bodies. Information in the form of energy streams in simultaneously through all of our sensory systems. And then it explodes into this enormous collage of what this present moment looks like. What this present moment smells like and tastes like, what it feels like and what it sounds like. I am an energy being connected to the energy all around me through the consciousness of my right hemisphere. We are energy beings connected to one another through the consciousness of our right hemispheres as one human family. And right here, right now, all we are brothers and sisters on this planet, here to make the world a better place. And in this moment we are perfect. We are whole. And we are beautiful.
My left hemisphere is a very different place. Our left hemisphere thinks linearly and methodically. Our left hemisphere is all about the past, and it's all about the future. Our left hemisphere is designed to take that enormous collage of the present moment. And start picking details and more details and more details about those details. It then categorizes and organizes all that information. Associates it with everything in the past we've ever learned and projects into the future all of our possibilities. And our left hemisphere thinks in language. It's that ongoing brain chatter that connects me and my internal world to my external world. It's that little voice that says to me, "Hey, you gotta remember to pick up bananas on your way home, and eat 'em in the morning." It's that calculating intelligence that reminds me when I have to do my laundry. But perhaps most important, it's that little voice that says to me, "I am. I am." And as soon as my left hemisphere says to me "I am," I become separate. I become a single solid individual separate from the energy flow around me and separate from you.
And this was the portion of my brain that I lost on the morning of my stroke.
On the morning of the stroke, I woke up to a pounding pain behind my left eye. And it was the kind of pain, caustic pain, that you get when you bite into ice cream. And it just gripped me and then it released me. Then it just gripped me and then released me. And it was very unusual for me to experience any kind of pain, so I thought OK, I'll just start my normal routine. So I got up and I jumped onto my cardio glider, which is a full-body exercise machine. And I'm jamming away on this thing, and I'm realizing that my hands looked like primitive claws grasping onto the bar. I thought "that's very peculiar" and I looked down at my body and I thought, "whoa, I'm a weird-looking thing." And it was as though my consciousness had shifted away from my normal perception of reality, where I'm the person on the machine having the experience, to some esoteric space where I'm witnessing myself having this experience.
And it was all every peculiar and my headache was just getting worse, so I get off the machine, and I'm walking across my living room floor, and I realize that everything inside of my body has slowed way down. And every step is very rigid and very deliberate. There's no fluidity to my pace, and there's this constriction in my area of perceptions so I'm just focused on internal systems. And I'm standing in my bathroom getting ready to step into the shower and I could actually hear the dialog inside of my body. I heard a little voice saying, "OK, you muscles, you gotta contract, you muscles you relax."
And I lost my balance and I'm propped up against the wall. And I look down at my arm and I realize that I can no longer define the boundaries of my body. I can't define where I begin and where I end. Because the atoms and the molecules of my arm blended with the atoms and molecules of the wall. And all I could detect was this energy. Energy. And I'm asking myself, "What is wrong with me, what is going on?" And in that moment, my brain chatter, my left hemisphere brain chatter went totally silent. Just like someone took a remote control and pushed the mute button and -- total silence.
And at first I was shocked to find myself inside of a silent mind. But then I was immediately captivated by the magnificence of energy around me. And because I could no longer identify the boundaries of my body, I felt enormous and expansive. I felt at one with all the energy that was, and it was beautiful there.
Then all of a sudden my left hemisphere comes back online and it says to me, "Hey! we got a problem, we got a problem, we gotta get some help." So it's like, OK, OK, I got a problem, but then I immediately drifted right back out into the consciousness, and I affectionately referred to this space as La La Land. But it was beautiful there. Imagine what it would be like to be totally disconnected from your brain chatter that connects you to the external world. So here I am in this space and any stress related to my, to my job, it was gone. And I felt lighter in my body. And imagine all of the relationships in the external world and the many stressors related to any of those, they were gone. I felt a sense of peacefulness. And imagine what it would feel like to lose 37 years of emotional baggage! I felt euphoria. Euphoria was beautiful -- and then my left hemisphere comes online and it says "Hey! you've got to pay attention, we've got to get help," and I'm thinking, "I got to get help, I gotta focus." So I get out of the shower and I mechanically dress and I'm walking around my apartment, and I'm thinking, "I gotta get to work, I gotta get to work, can I drive? can I drive?"
And in that moment my right arm went totally paralyzed by my side. And I realized, "Oh my gosh! I'm having a stroke! I'm having a stroke!" And the next thing my brain says to me is, "Wow! This is so cool. This is so cool. How many brain scientists have the opportunity to study their own brain from the inside out?"
And then it crosses my mind: "But I'm a very busy woman. I don't have time for a stroke!" So I'm like, "OK, I can't stop the stroke from happening so I'll do this for a week or two, and then I'll get back to my routine, OK."
So I gotta call help, I gotta call work. I couldn't remember the number at work, so I remembered, in my office I had a business card with my number on it. So I go in my business room, I pull out a 3-inch stack of business cards. And I'm looking at the card on top, and even though I could see clearly in my mind's eye what my business card looked like, I couldn't tell if this was my card or not, because all I could see were pixels. And the pixels of the words blended with the pixels of the background and the pixels of the symbols, and I just couldn't tell. And I would wait for what I call a wave of clarity. And in that moment, I would be able to reattach to normal reality and I could tell, that's not the card, that's not the card, that's not the card. It took me 45 minutes to get one inch down inside of that stack of cards.
In the meantime, for 45 minutes the hemorrhage is getting bigger in my left hemisphere. I do not understand numbers, I do not understand the telephone, but it's the only plan I have. So I take the phone pad and I put it right here, I'd take the business card, I'd put it right here, and I'm matching the shape of the squiggles on the card to the shape of the squiggles on the phone pad. But then I would drift back out into La La Land, and not remember when I come back if I'd already dialed those numbers.
So I had to wield my paralyzed arm like a stump, and cover the numbers as I went along and pushed them, so that as I would come back to normal reality I'd be able to tell, yes, I've already dialed that number. Eventually the whole number gets dialed, and I'm listening to the phone, and my colleague picks up the phone and he says to me, "Whoo woo wooo woo woo." [laughter] And I think to myself, "Oh my gosh, he sounds like a golden retriever!" And so I say to him, clear in my mind I say to him. "This is Jill! I need help!" And what comes out of my voice is, "Whoo woo wooo woo woo." I'm thinking, "Oh my gosh, I sound like a golden retriever." So I couldn't know, I didn't know that I couldn't speak or understand language until I tried.
So he recognizes that I need help, and he gets me help. And a little while later, I am riding in an ambulance from one hospital across Boston to Mass General Hospital. And I curl up into a little fetal ball. And just like a balloon with the last bit of air just, just right out of the balloon I felt my energy lift and I felt my spirit surrender. And in that moment I knew that I was no longer the choreographer of my life. And either the doctors rescue my body and give me a second chance at life or this was perhaps my moment of transition.
When I awoke later that afternoon I was shocked to discover that I was still alive. When I felt my spirit surrender, I said goodbye to my life, and my mind is now suspended between two very opposite planes of reality. Stimulation coming in through my sensory systems felt like pure pain. Light burned my brain like wildfire and sounds were so loud and chaotic that I could not pick a voice out from the background noise and I just wanted to escape. Because I could not identify the position of my body in space, I felt enormous and expensive, like a genie just liberated from her bottle. And my spirit soared free like a great whale gliding through the sea of silent euphoria. Harmonic. I remember thinking there's no way I would ever be able to squeeze the enormousness of myself back inside this tiny little body.
But I realized "But I'm still alive! I'm still alive and I have found Nirvana. And if I have found Nirvana and I'm still alive, then everyone who is alive can find Nirvana." I picture a world filled with beautiful, peaceful, compassionate, loving people who knew that they could come to this space at any time. And that they could purposely choose to step to the right of their left hemispheres and find this peace. And then I realized what a tremendous gift this experience could be, what a stroke of insight this could be to how we live our lives. And it motivated my to recover.
Two and a half weeks after the hemorrhage, the surgeons went in and they removed a blood clot the size of a golf ball that was pushing on my language centers. Here I am with my mama, who's a true angel in my life. It took me eight years to completely recover.
So who are we? We are the life force power of the universe, with manual dexterity and two cognitive minds. And we have the power to choose, moment by moment, who and how we want to be in the world. Right here right now, I can step into the consciousness of my right hemisphere where we are -- I am -- the life force power of the universe, and the life force power of the 50 trillion beautiful molecular geniuses that make up my form. At one with all that is. Or I can choose to step into the consciousness of my left hemisphere. where I become a single individual, a solid, separate from the flow, separate from you. I am Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, intellectual, neuroanatomist. These are the "we" inside of me.
Which would you choose? Which do you choose? And when? I believe that the more time we spend choosing to run the deep inner peace circuitry of our right hemispheres, the more peace we will project into the world and the more peaceful our planet will be. And I thought that was an idea worth spreading. -
loss of the "I", "me" and "my body" focal point
i don't know whether i get u right .But loss of "I", "me" and "my body" in buddhism context means that u forget the form of "I", "me" and "my body",not ur inner self"i" "me".As Zen told ,�身�佛。mean when u reveal ur inner self u r enlightment.So forget the form of i me,but do not forget u real self.Put it simple ,sometimes u forget ur inner self ,although u don't like sth ,but u feel that u like it sometime.Buddhism is about balance ur sub consciousness ,and consciousness.
-
Originally posted by rokkie:
loss of the "I", "me" and "my body" focal point
i don't know whether i get u right .But loss of "I", "me" and "my body" in buddhism context means that u forget the form of "I", "me" and "my body",not ur inner self"i" "me".As Zen told ,�身�佛。mean when u reveal ur inner self u r enlightment.So forget the form of i me,but do not forget u real self.Put it simple ,sometimes u forget ur inner self ,although u don't like sth ,but u feel that u like it sometime.Buddhism is about balance ur sub consciousness ,and consciousness.
There is no inner self, nor outer self, nor in between. Buddha did not teach an inner Atman, he teach Anatta -- No Atman. No-Self. Consciousness is not a Self, not an entity, but a process that is conditioned arising. I can go into that further if you wish.
The idea of an Atman (Self) as taught by Hinduism that is the Soul, which is not the body or mind but the notion of a permanent inner "core" that is the true "essence" of a being, who is the experiencer and controller of his life, which transmigrates from lifetime to lifetime and inhabits different bodies upon reincarnation, is refuted by Buddha, who taught in the essential teachings of Anatta that there is no inner core -- no soul or a Self at all. Enlightenment is realising the emptiness of both self and phenomena.
'Ji shen cheng fo' is a Tibetan saying, not Zen. But all traditions agree to the extent that it is possible to attain realisation (of ultimate reality) or enlightenment in this lifetime, this is the meaning of "attaining enlightenment in this body". This statement has nothing with finding an "inner self". No "inner self" can be found -- when you reach realisation/enlightenment, you'll see that there is no separate, permanent, identifiable 'self'.
Then what is the "True Self" that some people talk about? "True Self" is neither inner nor outer -- it is the empty-cognizant quality that pervades all our experience. When we experience a thought, or a sight, or a sound, or a smell, or a touch, or a taste, whatever it is that we experience, is a manifestation of Buddha-nature (i.e. True Self) which has the quality of cognizance/awareness while at the same time Empty of any fixed inherent existence. Whatever we experience is empty while at the same time the appearance of our perceiving nature.
"True Self" is actually NO self -- the true nature of self when realised is found to be Empty, and at the same time Cognizant, Aware, manifesting as all appearances. So our true nature, true self, is actually luminous-emptiness. We realise that this True Self, Buddha-nature, has no inner-outer separation, is empty and has no center nor circumference, and is infinite/boundless and all-pervading. It is not a thing (empty!), much less an eternal Self -- and is inseparable from the transience of all our experience. All our experiences, the sound of bird chirping, sceneries, all are One Taste, all are the manifestation of our true nature, empty-cognizance/awareness.
-
Life (Self) is nothing other than the continuous flow of the Now Moment.
The Now Moment ceases as it arises. This moment must completely ceased
and serves as the CAUSE for the next moment to arise.
Therefore Self is a process of series Self1, Self2, Self3, Self4, Self5, Self6...etc
A fixed entity 'Self' does not exist, what really exists is a momentary Self.
Under deep meditation, one is able to observe and sense the karmic and mental factors from moment to moment,
it is these factors that are succeeded from moment to moment and life and life but not a fixed entity.~ our moderator, Thusness -
To study the Buddha Way is to study the self
To study the self is to forget the self
To forget the self is to be enlightened by the ten thousand dharmas.
To be enlightened by the ten thousand dharmas is to free one's body and mind and those of others.~ Zen Master Dogen Zenji
Superb!
-
http://www.springwatercenter.org/teachers/packer/articles/whatisme/
What Is The "Me"?
The following article was adapted from a talk by Toni Packer on Day 4 of the August 1997 retreat.
A somber day, isn't it? Dark, cloudy, cool, moist and windy. Amazing, this whole affair of "the weather!" We call it "weather," but what is it really? Wind. Rain. Clouds slowly parting. Not the words spoken about it, but just this darkening, blowing, pounding, wetting, and then lightening up, blue sky appearing amidst darkness, and sunshine sparkling on wet grasses and leaves. In a little while there'll be frost, snow and ice-covers. And then warming again, melting, oozing water everywhere. On an early spring day the dirt road sparkles with streams of wet silver. So — what is "weather" other than this incessant change of earthly conditions and all the human thoughts, feelings, and undertakings influenced by it? Like and dislike. Depression and elation. Creation and destruction. An ongoing, ever changing stream of happenings abiding nowhere. No entity "weather" to be found except in thinking and talking about it.
Now — is there such an entity as "me," "I," "myself?" Or is it just like the "weather" — an ongoing, ever changing stream of ideas, images, memories, projections, likes and dislikes, creations and destructions, which thought keeps calling "I," "me," "Toni," and thereby solidifying what is evanescent? What am I really, truly, and what do I think and believe I am? Are we interested in exploring this amazing affair of "myself" from moment to moment? Is this, maybe, the essence of retreat work? Exploring ourselves minutely beyond the peace and quiet that we are seeking and maybe finding. Coming upon clarity about this deep sense of separation which we call "me," and "other people," without any need to condemn or overcome.
Most human beings take it totally for granted that I am "me," and that "me" is this body, this mind, this knowledge and sense about myself which so obviously feels separate from other people. The language in which we talk to ourselves and to each other inevitably implies separate "me's," and "you's" all the time. All of us talk "I" and "you" talk, we think it, write it, read it, and dream it with rarely any pause. There is incessant reinforcement of the sense of "I," "me," separate from others. Isolated. Insulated. Not understood. How is one to come upon the truth if separation is taken so much for granted, feels so common sense?
The difficulty is not insurmountable. Wholeness, true being, is here all the time, like the sun behind the clouds. Daylight is here in spite of cloud cover.
What makes up the clouds?
Can we begin to realize that we live in conceptual, abstract ideas about ourselves? That we are rarely directly in touch with what actually is going on? Can we realize that thoughts about myself — I am good or bad, I'm liked or disliked — are nothing but thoughts — and that thoughts do not tell us the truth about what we really are? A thought is a thought, and it triggers instant physical reactions, pleasures and pains throughout the bodymind. Physical reactions generate further thoughts and feelings about myself — "I'm suffering," "I'm happy," "I'm no good." Feedback that implies that all this is me, that I have gotten hurt, or somehow feel good about myself, or that I need to defend myself, or get more approval and love from others. When we're protecting ourselves in our daily interrelationships we're not protecting ourselves from flying stones or bomb attacks. It's from words we're taking cover, from gestures, from colorations of voice and innuendo.
Just now words were spoken, ". . . we're protecting ourselves, . . . we're taking cover." In using our common language the implication is constantly created that there is someone real who is protecting and someone real that needs protection.
Is there someone real to be protected from words and gestures, or are we merely living in ideas and stories about me and you, all of it happening on the stage of the on-going audio/video drama of ourselves?
The utmost care and attention is needed to follow the internal drama fairly accurately, dispassionately, in order to express it as it is seen. What we mean by "being made to feel good" or "being hurt" is the internal enhancing of our ongoing me-story, or the puncturing and deflating of it. Enhancement or disturbance of the me-story is accompanied by pleasurable energies or painful feelings and emotions throughout the organism. Either warmth or chill can be felt at the drop of a word evoking memories, feelings, passions. Conscious or unconscious emotional recollection of what happened yesterday or a long ago surge through the body-mind, causing feelings of happiness or sadness, affection or humiliation.
Right now words are being spoken, and they can be followed literally, intellectually. If they are fairly clearly and logically put together they can make sense intellectually. Perhaps at first it's necessary to understand what is going on in us intellectually. But that's not the whole thing. The words that are spoken point to something that may be directly seen and felt, inwardly, as the talk proceeds. And as we go along from moment to moment, now and after the talk is over, (and after retreat) can we experience freshly, wakefully, directly, when hurt or flattery are taking place? What is happening? What is being hurt? And what keeps the hurt going? Can there be some awareness of defenses arising, fear and anger forming, or withdrawal taking place, all accompanied by some kind of storyline? Can the whole drama become increasingly transparent? And, in becoming increasingly transparent, can it be thoroughly questioned? What is it that is being protected? What is it that one thinks got hurt? Me? What is me?
It is amazing. A spark of awareness witnessing one spoken word arousing pleasure or pain all over. Can the connection become clear? The immediacy of it, and no I-entity there directing it, even though we say and believe we are doing all that. But we also say that we don't want to do that. Words and reaction proceed along well-oiled pathways and interconnections. A thought of loss comes up and the solar plexus tightens in pain. Fantasy of love-making occurs and an ocean of pleasure ensues. Who does it? Thought says, "I do!" To whom is it happening? Thought says, "To me of course!" But, where and what is this I, this me, aside from all the thoughts and feelings, the palpitating heart, painful and pleasurable energies circulating throughout the organism? Who could possibly be doing it all with such amazing speed and precision? Thinking about ourselves and triggering physiological reactions take time, but present awareness brings the whole drama to light instantly. Everything is happening on its own. No one is directing the show!
Right this moment wind is storming, branches are creaking and leaves quivering. It's all here in the listening — but whose listening is it? Mine? Yours? We say, "I'm listening" or, "I cannot listen as well as you do" and these words befuddle the mind with feelings and emotions learned long ago. You may be protesting that "my hearing isn't yours. Your body isn't mine." We have thought like that for eons and behave accordingly, but presently, can there be just the sound of swaying trees and rustling leaves and fresh air blowing through the window cooling the skin? It's not happening to anyone. It's simply present for all of us, isn't it?
Do I sound as though I'm trying to convince you of something? The passion arising in trying to communicate simply, clearly, may be misunderstood for a desire to influence people. That's not the case. There is just the description of what is happening here for all of us. Nothing to be sold or bought. Can we simply listen and test out on our own what is being offered for exploration from moment to moment?
What is the "me" that gets hurt or attracted, flattered, time and time again, the world over? In psychological terms we say that we are identified with ourselves. In spiritual language we say, that we are attached to ourselves. What is this "ourselves?" Is it feeling myself existing, knowing what I am, having lots of recollections about myself — all the ideas and pictures and feelings about myself strung together in a coherent story? And knowing this story very well — multitudes of memories, some added, some dropped, all inter-connected — what I am, how I look, what my abilities and disabilities are, my education, my family, my name, my likes and dislikes, opinions, beliefs, etc., etc. The identification with all of that, meaning, "This is what I am." And the attachment to it, meaning, "I can't let go of it."
Let's go beyond concepts and look directly into what we mean by them. If one says, "I'm identified with my family name," what does that mean? Let me give an example. As a growing child I was very much identified with my last name because it was my father's and he was famous — so I was told. I liked to tell others about my father's scientific achievements to garner respect and pleasurable feelings for myself by impressing friends. I felt admiration through other people's eyes which may not even have been there. It may have been projected. Perhaps some people even felt, "What a bore she is!" On the entrance door to our apartment there was a little polished brass sign with my father's name on it and his titles: Professor, Doctor Phil. The Phil impressed me particularly, because I thought it meant that my father was a philosopher, which he was not. I must have had the idea that a philosopher was a particularly imposing individual. So I told some of my friends about it and brought them to look at the little brass sign at the door. This is one meaning of identification — enhancing one's sense of self by incorporating the ideas about other individuals or groups, or one's possessions, achievements, transgressions — anything — and feeling that all of this is "me." Feeling important about oneself generates amazing, addictive energies.
To give another example from the past: I became very identified with my half-Jewish descent. Not openly in Germany, where I mostly tried to hide it rather than display it, but later on after the war ended, telling people of our family's fate, and finding welcome attention, instant sympathy, and nourishing interest in the story. One can become quite addicted to making the story of one's life impressive to others and to oneself, and feed on the energies aroused by that. So that's a bit of what identification and attachment are about. And when that is disturbed by someone not buying into it, contesting it or questioning it altogether, there is sudden insecurity, physical discomfort, anger, fear, hurt, whatever.
Becoming a member of the Zen Center and engaging in spiritual practice, I realized one day that I had not been talking about my background in a long while. And now, when somebody brings it up — sometimes an interviewer will ask me to talk about it — it feels like so much bother and effort. Why delve into old stuff? I want to talk about listening, the wind, and the birds. [Laughter] Are you listening too, interviewer? Or are you more interested in identities and stories?
At times people bring up the question about why I don't call myself a teacher when I'm so obviously engaged in teaching. Somebody actually brought it up this morning — the projections and mental as well as psychological associations aroused in waiting outside the meeting room and then entering nervously with a pounding heart. The images of teacher and student offering themselves automatically like clothes to put on and roles to play in these clothes. In giving talks and meeting with people the student-teacher imagery is not there — it belongs to a different level of existence. If images do come up they're in the way like clouds hiding the sun. Relating without images is the freshest, freest thing in the universe.
So, what am I and what are you — what are we with- out images clothing and hiding our true being? It's un-image-inable, isn't it? And yet there's the sound of wind blowing, trees shaking, crows cawing, woodwork creaking, breath flowing without need for any thoughts. Thoughts are grafted on top of what's actually going on right now, and in that grafted world we happen to spend most of our lives.
And yet, every once in a while, whether one does spiritual work or not, meditating or not, the real world shines wondrously through everything. What is it when words fall silent? When there is no knowing? When there is no listener and yet there is listening, awaring, without any separation?
A moment during a visit with my parents in Switzerland comes to mind. I had always had a difficult relationship with my mother. I was very afraid of her. She was a very passionate woman with lots of anger. But also love. Once during that visit I saw her standing in the dining room facing me. She was just standing there, and for no known reason or cause I suddenly saw her without the past. There was no image of her, and also no idea of what she saw in me. All that was gone. There was nothing left except pure love for this woman. Such beauty shone out of her. And our relationship changed, there was a new closeness. It just happened.
Someone said that seeing a shattered image caused grief. But the shattering of self-image need not cause suffering. Truly seeing that the "me" is nothing but a habitual mental construct is freeing beyond imagination.
-
'Ji shen cheng fo' is a Tibetan saying, not Zen. But all traditions agree to the extent that it is possible to attain realisation (of ultimate reality) or enlightenment in this lifetime, this is the meaning of "attaining enlightenment in this body". This statement has nothing with finding an "inner self". No "inner self" can be found -- when you reach realisation/enlightenment, you'll see that there is no separate, permanent, identifiable 'self'.
========================
i don't know why u think that way .Have u ever read platform sutra(��)by huineng .Diamond sutra and platform sutra are fundanmental for Zen.In platform sutra ,it raise the concept jishenchengfo.This is the basis for Zen,--观心.It's quite different from the original buddhism in Hindu .which ask ppl to practice hard ,but for Zen ,u can suddenly enlightend which called 顿悟,and zen call that buddhism in hindu �悟。Tibet buddhism is quite different with mainland buddhism ,it's basically 密宗.And Tibetan think there buddhism is superior to mainland buddhism,as the mainland buddhist consider the same way.Tibetan consider the jishenchengfo is no good .They don't believe that ppl can suddenly enlightened.They believe ppl must practice hard.
But nowadays, all the sects are kind of mixture of all.If u think jishenchengfo is a Tibetan saying ,i think it's because tibetan buddhism absorb the concept from Zen.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
There is no inner self, nor outer self, nor in between. Buddha did not teach an inner Atman, he teach Anatta -- No Atman. No-Self. Consciousness is not a Self, not an entity, but a process that is conditioned arising. I can go into that further if you wish.
The idea of an Atman (Self) as taught by Hinduism that is the Soul, which is not the body or mind but the notion of a permanent inner "core" that is the true "essence" of a being, who is the experiencer and controller of his life, which transmigrates from lifetime to lifetime and inhabits different bodies upon reincarnation, is refuted by Buddha, who taught in the essential teachings of Anatta that there is no inner core -- no soul or a Self at all. Enlightenment is realising the emptiness of both self and phenomena.
'Ji shen cheng fo' is a Tibetan saying, not Zen. But all traditions agree to the extent that it is possible to attain realisation (of ultimate reality) or enlightenment in this lifetime, this is the meaning of "attaining enlightenment in this body". This statement has nothing with finding an "inner self". No "inner self" can be found -- when you reach realisation/enlightenment, you'll see that there is no separate, permanent, identifiable 'self'.
Then what is the "True Self" that some people talk about? "True Self" is neither inner nor outer -- it is the empty-cognizant quality that pervades all our experience. When we experience a thought, or a sight, or a sound, or a smell, or a touch, or a taste, whatever it is that we experience, is a manifestation of Buddha-nature (i.e. True Self) which has the quality of cognizance/awareness while at the same time Empty of any fixed inherent existence. Whatever we experience is empty while at the same time the appearance of our perceiving nature.
"True Self" is actually NO self -- the true nature of self when realised is found to be Empty, and at the same time Cognizant, Aware, manifesting as all appearances. So our true nature, true self, is actually luminous-emptiness. We realise that this True Self, Buddha-nature, has no inner-outer separation, is empty and has no center nor circumference, and is infinite/boundless and all-pervading. It is not a thing (empty!), much less an eternal Self -- and is inseparable from the transience of all our experience. All our experiences, the sound of bird chirping, sceneries, all are One Taste, all are the manifestation of our true nature, empty-cognizance/awareness.
this question is very profound ,i don't know how to answer u with my limited knowledge of english.Maybe u could do some reading on Nagarjuna (é¾™æ ‘)ä¸è§‚论。Some times 有è§�ä¸�å�¯æ€•ã€‚如果ç�€äº†ç©ºè§�也ä¸�是什么好的事情
-
Originally posted by rokkie:
'Ji shen cheng fo' is a Tibetan saying, not Zen. But all traditions agree to the extent that it is possible to attain realisation (of ultimate reality) or enlightenment in this lifetime, this is the meaning of "attaining enlightenment in this body". This statement has nothing with finding an "inner self". No "inner self" can be found -- when you reach realisation/enlightenment, you'll see that there is no separate, permanent, identifiable 'self'.
========================
i don't know why u think that way .Have u ever read platform sutra(��)by huineng .Diamond sutra and platform sutra are fundanmental for Zen.In platform sutra ,it raise the concept jishenchengfo.This is the basis for Zen,--观心.It's quite different from the original buddhism in Hindu .which ask ppl to practice hard ,but for Zen ,u can suddenly enlightend which called 顿悟,and zen call that buddhism in hindu �悟。Tibet buddhism is quite different with mainland buddhism ,it's basically 密宗.And Tibetan think there buddhism is superior to mainland buddhism,as the mainland buddhist consider the same way.Tibetan consider the jishenchengfo is no good .They don't believe that ppl can suddenly enlightened.They believe ppl must practice hard.
But nowadays, all the sects are kind of mixture of all.If u think jishenchengfo is a Tibetan saying ,i think it's because tibetan buddhism absorb the concept from Zen.
'Ji shen cheng fo' means attaining Buddhahood in one lifetime. This concept is only to be found in Vajrayana/Tibetan Buddhism, Zen Master Hui Neng never said "ji sheng cheng fo". Tibetan Buddhism stresses it is the highest vehicle because it can allow the practitioner to attain full Buddhahood in this lifetime. This is not at all a concept absorbed from Zen, because Zen never taught attaining full Buddhahood in this lifetime -- it taught that our Mind's essence can be realised instantaneously, which is not the same as attaining full Buddhahood. The concept of Ji Shen Cheng Fo is found in all the ancient Tibetan tantras/scriptures.
I have no comments about the validity of 'Ji Sheng Cheng Fo' and how it can be achieved, since I am not a Vajrayana practitioner. I practice more of Chinese Mahayana. BTW just wondering you're Singaporean?
"Dun4 Wu4" means instantaneous awakening, but it is different from the notion of attaining full Buddhahood like Shakyamuni -- it is more like waking up to our original Buddha-nature, but this does not yet mean that we have attained full Buddhahood. Even a glimpse or awakening to our Buddha-Nature, one still has to practice a long time of purification, transformation, practicing the Bodhisattva path, and developing further insights and clarity before full Buddhahood can be achieved. If you realise Buddha-nature, you attain to the 1st Bhumi of the Bodhisattva path. There are 10 bhumis.
Also, I think you misunderstood what Hinduism is. Hinduism is not Buddhism -- Hinduism is �度教 -- the religion practiced in India now. It is the 3rd largest most populous religion in the world, after Christianity and Islam. Buddhism is the 4th.
It is Hinduism that teaches the notion of a inner Soul or eternal Self. This is Eternalism (常è§�), and this is refuted as a false view by Buddha. Buddha teach No-Self, and the middle way beyond eternalism (常è§�) and nihlism (æ–è§�).
-
Originally posted by rokkie:
this question is very profound ,i don't know how to answer u with my limited knowledge of english.Maybe u could do some reading on Nagarjuna (é¾™æ ‘)ä¸è§‚论。Some times 有è§�ä¸�å�¯æ€•ã€‚如果ç�€äº†ç©ºè§�也ä¸�是什么好的事情
What I wrote is not �了空� -- one can only �了空� if one thinks that emptiness is truly existing and so holds it as a view that is ultimate.
What I wrote is in accord with the Buddhist teachings of emptiness.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
'Ji shen cheng fo' means attaining Buddhahood in one lifetime. This concept is only to be found in Vajrayana/Tibetan Buddhism, Zen Master Hui Neng never said "ji sheng cheng fo". Tibetan Buddhism stresses it is the highest vehicle because it can allow the practitioner to attain full Buddhahood in this lifetime. This is not at all a concept absorbed from Zen, because Zen never taught attaining full Buddhahood in this lifetime -- it taught that our Mind's essence can be realised instantaneously, which is not the same as attaining full Buddhahood. The concept of Ji Shen Cheng Fo is found in all the ancient Tibetan tantras/scriptures.
I have no comments about the validity of 'Ji Sheng Cheng Fo' and how it can be achieved, since I am not a Vajrayana practitioner. I practice more of Chinese Mahayana. BTW just wondering you're Singaporean?
"Dun4 Wu4" means instantaneous awakening, but it is different from the notion of attaining full Buddhahood like Shakyamuni -- it is more like waking up to our original Buddha-nature, but this does not yet mean that we have attained full Buddhahood. Even a glimpse or awakening to our Buddha-Nature, one still has to practice a long time of purification, transformation, practicing the Bodhisattva path, and developing further insights and clarity before full Buddhahood can be achieved. If you realise Buddha-nature, you attain to the 1st Bhumi of the Bodhisattva path. There are 10 bhumis.
Also, I think you misunderstood what Hinduism is. Hinduism is not Buddhism -- Hinduism is �度教 -- the religion practiced in India now. It is the 3rd largest most populous religion in the world, after Christianity and Islam. Buddhism is the 4th.
It is Hinduism that teaches the notion of a inner Soul or eternal Self. This is Eternalism (常è§�), and this is refuted as a false view by Buddha. Buddha teach No-Self, and the middle way beyond eternalism (常è§�) and nihlism (æ–è§�).
I think i have made a mistake .Confusing the �心�佛and �身�佛。
å�³å¿ƒæˆ�ä½›is not shownd exactly the same word in platform sutra but the meaning is the same ，like æˆ‘å¿ƒè‡ªæœ‰ä½›ï¼Œè‡ªä½›æ˜¯çœŸä½›ï¼Œè‡ªè‹¥æ— ä½›å¿ƒï¼Œä½•å¤„æ±‚çœŸä½›, 若能心ä¸è‡ªè§�真，有真å�³æ˜¯æˆ�ä½›å› ï¼Œä¸�è§�自性外觅佛，起心总是大痴人。i have thought that the two phrase means the same thing,it's a mistake.
answer ur question ,i am not singaporean.
And i know hinduism is different with buddhism,as someone said that before buddha awaken,hinduism is very popular in india ,and buddha has learnt that as well ,as he is high social status in the hierarchy.I have read some of the upanishad,I think some of the concept of the two are overlapped.
-
Originally posted by rokkie:
I think i have made a mistake .Confusing the �心�佛and �身�佛。
å�³å¿ƒæˆ�ä½›is not shownd exactly the same word in platform sutra but the meaning is the same ，like æˆ‘å¿ƒè‡ªæœ‰ä½›ï¼Œè‡ªä½›æ˜¯çœŸä½›ï¼Œè‡ªè‹¥æ— ä½›å¿ƒï¼Œä½•å¤„æ±‚çœŸä½›, 若能心ä¸è‡ªè§�真，有真å�³æ˜¯æˆ�ä½›å› ï¼Œä¸�è§�自性外觅佛，起心总是大痴人。i have thought that the two phrase means the same thing,it's a mistake.
answer ur question ,i am not singaporean.
And i know hinduism is different with buddhism,as someone said that before buddha awaken,hinduism is very popular in india ,and buddha has learnt that as well ,as he is high social status in the hierarchy.I have read some of the upanishad,I think some of the concept of the two are overlapped.
I see. Yes, it is taught that Mind is Buddha -- Mind as in our mind essence. But not to mistake "mind" as a self -- in fact when you read Shurangama sutra, Buddha asked Ananda where is mind? Ananda gave a whole list of speculation, but at each time the Buddha denied him. In another case, 1st Ch'an master Bodhidharma asked Shen Hsiu to give him his mind. He could not find it either, and was awakened.
The eventual conclusion of the chapter in Shurangama Sutra is that Mind has no location -- the Mind is EMPTY! But at the same time it has quality of Awareness -- and all our experiences are only manifestation of Mind-essence! This empty-awareness is the nature of Mind. Since it is empty, it is not a self and it is not eternal. There is also no separation between Mind and all perceived phenomena -- all appearances are Mind-only. All of them are expression of Buddha Nature, there is no perceiver apart from the perceived -- observer is the observed. Hence, there is no inner and outer.
Regarding Hinduism and Upanishads, Hinduism has similarities with Buddhism, but there is a very fundamental difference -- the Hindus who experienced Mind's cognisance/luminous awareness mistakes his experience and treats it as a real ultimate Self/Soul/Atman. The experience objectified is thought to be Self, Eternal, and the ultimate Subject.. the ultimate Witness/Seer/Observer. Hence they cannot penetrate the Mind's essence.
They did not realise it's emptiness, and they cannot comprehend No-Self. They did not realise that Observer is the Observed, awareness is simply a knowingness not separated from the flow of manifestation... it is not an eternal subject separated. Because of their karmic propensities of perceiving their experience in a dualistic framework (perceiving in terms of Subject and Object), awareness is treated to be the eternal Self, watching the transient flow of phenomena, which is duality -- (there are two components here -- "watcher" and "phenomena").
They have only experienced the relative nature of mind, but not the ultimate nature of mind. And the experience is then misunderstood. My friend Thusness would tell me 明心 does not really mean �性 and I agree.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
I see. Yes, it is taught that Mind is Buddha -- Mind as in our mind essence. But not to mistake "mind" as a self -- in fact when you read Shurangama sutra, Buddha asked Ananda where is mind? Ananda gave a whole list of speculation, but at each time the Buddha denied him. In another case, 1st Ch'an master Bodhidharma asked Shen Hsiu to give him his mind. He could not find it either, and was awakened.
The eventual conclusion of the chapter in Shurangama Sutra is that Mind has no location -- the Mind is EMPTY! But at the same time it has quality of Awareness -- and all our experiences are only manifestation of Mind-essence! This empty-awareness is the nature of Mind. Since it is empty, it is not a self and it is not eternal. There is also no separation between Mind and all perceived phenomena -- all appearances are Mind-only. All of them are expression of Buddha Nature, there is no perceiver apart from the perceived -- observer is the observed. Hence, there is no inner and outer.
Regarding Hinduism and Upanishads, Hinduism has similarities with Buddhism, but there is a very fundamental difference -- the Hindus who experienced Mind's cognisance/luminous awareness mistakes his experience and treats it as a real ultimate Self/Soul/Atman. The experience objectified is thought to be Self, Eternal, and the ultimate Subject.. the ultimate Witness/Seer/Observer. Hence they cannot penetrate the Mind's essence.
They did not realise it's emptiness, and they cannot comprehend No-Self. They did not realise that Observer is the Observed, awareness is simply a knowingness not separated from the flow of manifestation... it is not an eternal subject separated. Because of their karmic propensities of perceiving their experience in a dualistic framework (perceiving in terms of Subject and Object), awareness is treated to be the eternal Self, watching the transient flow of phenomena, which is duality -- (there are two components here -- "watcher" and "phenomena").
They have only experienced the relative nature of mind, but not the ultimate nature of mind. And the experience is then misunderstood. My friend Thusness would tell me 明心 does not really mean �性 and I agree.
In chinese traditional culture ,性 is a very interesting and complex stuff, maybe we can discuss it later
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
You obviously know nothing about Buddhism.
On the contrary, I know just too much about Buddhism and many other religions. -
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
On the contrary, I know just too much about Buddhism and many other religions.Ridiculous. Statements like yours obviously shows no understanding of Buddhist practices and teachings. Anyone who knows a single bit of Buddhist teachings will obviously see how ridiculous your statements are. There is no need to say further.
Any more off topic and ridiculous messages from you here will be deleted.
-
Off topic removed
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
BTW recently I watched this youtube video, I could recognise what she is saying. It's very good, do watch it if you can. I believe she had an awakening of some sort. Luckily my experience wasn't stroke... lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU
Full transcript:
I'm looking forward to watching Dr Jill Bolte Taylor's interview with Oprah :) She was also mentioned in the Oprah show with Eckhart Tolle.Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, the Singin' Scientist
Hello friends! Oh my gosh! Oh my gosh! Oh my gosh! Have you seen the cover of TIME May 12, 2008? If not, here it is...
Now look a little closer...we have tried to make it easy for you--here I am peeking out through the 'M' of TIME!
What an honor it has been to be chosen as one of TIME Magazine's 100 Most Influential in the World for 2008!
This all came about because I was invited to give an 18-minute presentation at the TED conference in Monterey, CA on February 27, 2008. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design - three wide-ranging subject areas that are, collectively, shaping our future. Every year, 1300 of the world's leading thinkers and doers gather together for four days of networking, education and exposure to new ideas. Past speakers and performers have included Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Paul Simon, Richard Branson, Frank Gehry, Philippe Starck, James Watson, Billy Graham, Jane Goodall, Al Gore, and Bono. However, TED is about much more than famous names. It is about passion, laughter, beauty, and ingenuity. It is about ideas capable of changing the world, and I was given 18 minutes to share my personal story and an idea that I believed was worth spreading. My experience at TED was both phenomenal and life transforming. See for yourself by visiting www.TED.com.Future Speaking Engagements
Catch Jill in person or tune in to watch or listen!
Wednesday, April 30
Bloomington, Indiana
Middle Way House
Fundraiser: Business and Professional Women's Luncheon
11:30am EDT
Monday, May 12
Soul Series webcast with Oprah Winfrey
Oprah.com
Each segment of Jill's four-part interview with Oprah will air for the next four Mondays starting May 12.
9:00pm EDT -
Hi Eternal Now
When you encounter the painfulness from the body for the long hour during meditation, how is mind contemplation on painfulness? How you handle it?
-
Originally posted by sofital:
Hi Eternal Now
When you encounter the painfulness from the body for the long hour during meditation, how is mind contemplation on painfulness? How you handle it?
Well, so far I have never had the experience of encountering painfulness for long hours during meditation. But I think what is important is to let go of all mental resistance and relax in a state of mindfulness. Be aware of the sensations but not to be attached to the sensations. Of course, also see a doctor, take your medicine or apply whatever things that eases the pain.
I think the following excerpts by Ven Gunaratana (btw did you read his book Mindfulness in Plain English? I think its a good read) might be helpful, and it beautifully described the possibility to be "nondual" with sensations of pain and thus freedom from pain:
http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe10.html
Problem 1
Physical PainNobody likes pain, yet everybody has some sometime. It is one of life's most common experiences and is bound to arise in your meditation in one form or another. Handling pain is a two-stage process. First, get rid of the pain if possible or at least get rid of it as much as possible. Then, if some pain lingers, use it as an abject of meditation.
The first step is physical handling. Maybe the pain is an illness of one sort or another, a headache, fever, bruises or whatever. In this case, employ standard medical treatments before you sit down to meditate: take your medicine, apply your liniment, do whatever you ordinarily do. Then there are certain pains that are specific to the seated posture. If you never spend much time sitting cross-legged on the floor, there will be an adjustment period. Some discomfort is nearly inevitable. According to where the pain is, there are specific remedies. If the pain is in the leg or knees, check you pants. If they are tight or made of thick material, that could be the problem. Try to change it. Check your cushion, too. It should be about three inches in height when compressed. If the pain is around your waist, try loosening your belt. Loosen the waistband of your pants is that is necessary. If you experience pain in your lower back, your posture is probably at fault. Slouching will never be comfortable, so straighten up. Don't be tight or rigid, but do keep your spine erect. Pain in the neck or upper back has several sources. The first is improper hand position. Your hands should be resting comfortably in your lap. Don't pull them up to your waist. Relax your arms and your neck muscles. Don't let your head droop forward. Keep it up and aligned with the rest of the spine.
After you have made all these various adjustments, you may find you still have some lingering pain. If that is the case, try step two. Make the pain your object of meditation. Don't jump up and down and get excited. Just observe the pain mindfully. When the pain becomes demanding, you will find it pulling your attention off the breath. Don't fight back. Just let your attention slide easily over onto the simple sensation. Go into the pain fully. Don't block the experience. Explore the feeling. Get beyond your avoiding reaction and go into the pure sensations that lie below that. You will discover that there are two things present. The first is the simple sensation--pain itself. Second is your resistance to that sensation. Resistance reaction is partly mental and partly physical. The physical part consists of tensing the muscles in and around the painful area. Relax those muscles. Take them one by one and relax each one very thoroughly. This step alone probably diminishes the pain significantly. Then go after the mental side of the resistance. Just as you are tensing physically, you are also tensing psychologically. You are clamping down mentally on the sensation of pain, trying to screen it off and reject it from consciousness. The rejection is a wordless, "I don't like this feeling" or "go away" attitude. It is very subtle. But it is there, and you can find it if you really look. Locate it and relax that, too.
That last part is more subtle. There are really no human words to describe this action precisely. The best way to get a handle on it is by analogy. Examine what you did to those tight muscles and transfer that same action over to the mental sphere; relax the mind in the same way that you relax the body. Buddhism recognizes that the body and mind are tightly linked. This is so true that many people will not see this as a two-step procedure. For them to relax the body is to relax the mind and vice versa. These people will experience the entire relaxation, mental and physical, as a single process. In any case, just let go completely till you awareness slows down past that barrier which you yourself erected. It was a gap, a sense of distance between self and others. It was a borderline between 'me' and 'the pain'. Dissolve that barrier, and separation vanishes. You slow down into that sea of surging sensation and you merge with the pain. You become the pain. You watch its ebb and flow and something surprising happens. It no longer hurts. Suffering is gone. Only the pain remains, an experience, nothing more. The 'me' who was being hurt has gone. The result is freedom from pain.
This is an incremental process. In the beginning, you can expect to succeed with small pains and be defeated by big ones. Like most of our skills, it grows with practice. The more you practice, the bigger the pain you can handle. Please understand fully. There is no masochism being advocated here. Self- mortification is not the point.
This is an exercise in awareness, not in sadism. If the pain becomes excruciating, go ahead and move, but move slowly and mindfully. Observe your movements. See how it feels to move. Watch what it does to the pain. Watch the pain diminish. Try not to move too much though. The less you move, the easier it is to remain fully mindful. New meditators sometimes say they have trouble remaining mindful when pain is present. This difficulty stems from a misunderstanding. These students are conceiving mindfulness as something distinct from the experience of pain. It is not. Mindfulness never exists by itself. It always has some object and one object is as good as another. Pain is a mental state. You can be mindful of pain just as you are mindful of breathing.
The rules we covered in Chapter 4 apply to pain just as they apply to any other mental state. You must be careful not to reach beyond the sensation and not to fall short of it. Don't add anything to it, and don't miss any part of it. Don't muddy the pure experience with concepts or pictures or discursive thinking. And keep your awareness right in the present time, right with the pain, so that you won't miss its beginning or its end. Pain not viewed in the clear light of mindfulness gives rise to emotional reactions like fear, anxiety, or anger. If it is properly viewed, we have no such reaction. It will be just sensation, just simple energy. Once you have learned this technique with physical pain, you can then generalize it in the rest of your life. You can use it on any unpleasant sensation. What works on pain will work on anxiety or chronic depression. This technique is one of life's most useful and generalizable skills. It is patience.