|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
 Posted - Feb 26 2008 : 02:13:00 AM
|
Hi emc
quote:
Christi,
That was truly a beautiful and earnest post with a pleasant softness to it! Thank you!
/emc
I am glad you liked it.  I really enjoy writing posts in the forum sometimes, especially when the topic is so relevant.
That was actually my fourth attempt to write that post. The three previous times I had contemplated what to write, but had gone into a trance state and was unable to type, so had to leave it to another day.
If I stop posting altogether, you'll know what has happened to me. 
Christi |
 |
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 26 2008 : 02:29:19 AM
|
Hi Yb,
quote:
Yb wrote:
Hi emc and Wolfgang,
One time I went to a puppy dog class and it was so fun. There were all kinds of breeds there, big, small, etc. A wide variety. It was hilarious to watch perhaps 15 puppies rollicking and gamboling about in the room with each other while all the owners sat around the edge. I asked the leader of the class why she let the puppies play like this for the first 10-15 minutes. She said that it socialized the dogs and made the more aggressive ones less aggressive and the less aggressive ones more aggressive. It balanced them out. It created a healthy social expression when they would meet other dogs on the street.
Woof, woof.
Best, yb.
What a lovely and somehow pertinent story.
It reminds me of a time when I had the good fortune to watch my daughters kindergarten teacher at work with the kids. I noticed how she would be stern and forceful with children who had a tendency to bully other kids and didn't think about others, but with children who were shy and timid, she would be gentle and kind. When I talked with the children later when they came round to visit, I noticed how the aggressive bullying kids thought the teacher was mean and nasty, but the timid shy kids thought she was gentle and sweet.
Actually she was neither; she was simply acting out of love, and was doing her best to help each individual child to develop. It was very beautiful to watch her.
What was even more interesting was that when I talked to the parents, they often held the same view as their own child. The parents of aggressive children thought the teacher was mean and nasty, and the parents of the shy timid children, thought the teacher was sweet and gentle.
When we are dreaming, everything is coloured by the dream. We miss the whole picture, and in doing so, we miss everything.
Christi
|
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Feb 26 2008 : 08:55:50 AM
|
Hi Christi,
Thanks for the story. A good a parallel.
quote:
Christi wrote:
When we are dreaming, everything is coloured by the dream. We miss the whole picture, and in doing so, we miss everything.....When I talked with the children later when they came round to visit, I noticed how the aggressive bullying kids thought the teacher was mean and nasty, but the timid shy kids thought she was gentle and sweet.
Funny.
And in this respect, one level of interpretating Krishnamurti's statement, "The observer is the observed" is this. Another is the one you put forward in your previous post.
From commentary on 'Light on the Path' in the book Advanced Course in Yogi Philosophy by Yogi Ramacharaka:
"We are all little scholars in life's great kindergarten."
The following quote doesn't have any thing to do with the above. It is what I was going to post before I read yours.
From the book Self Inquiry by Yogani:
"Just recognize that self-inquiry....is about going
beyond the machinations of the mind with simple
questions and automatic answers that rise in stillness –
easily favoring the stillness within."
Best, yb. |
Edited by - yogibear on Mar 04 2008 07:59:49 AM |
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Feb 26 2008 : 1:23:25 PM
|
quote:
Christi: It reminds me of a time when I had the good fortune to watch my daughters kindergarten teacher at work with the kids. I noticed how she would be stern and forceful with children who had a tendency to bully other kids and didn't think about others, but with children who were shy and timid, she would be gentle and kind. When I talked with the children later when they came round to visit, I noticed how the aggressive bullying kids thought the teacher was mean and nasty, but the timid shy kids thought she was gentle and sweet.
Actually she was neither; she was simply acting out of love, and was doing her best to help each individual child to develop. It was very beautiful to watch her.
What was even more interesting was that when I talked to the parents, they often held the same view as their own child. The parents of aggressive children thought the teacher was mean and nasty, and the parents of the shy timid children, thought the teacher was sweet and gentle.
Beautiful, Christi. The same applies to another teacher observing the interaction who may misconstrue the situation based on different methodology, until the manner of instruction becomes known:
VIL |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Feb 27 2008 : 07:47:10 AM
|
From the book Self Inquiry by Yogani:
The steady emergence of inner silence with
practices is the dynamic behind the progression of self inquiry
from non-relational to relational, until the
experiencer and the experience have merged to become
the One.
quote:
Christi wrote:
Krishnamurti was quite capable of speaking directly, and the “observer is the observed” stuff sounds very much like the merging of the witness and the witnessed which happens in the unification stage beyond absorption in the witness self.
From Yogani's book Self Inquiry:
"Next, it is also good to know that there is a natural
progression in our spiritual unfoldment which occurs
over time, usually over a long time, except in the rare
cases of people who are born near enlightenment.
It should be pointed out that there is witnessing and there
is witnessing. There is a continuum of development as
witnessing emerges."
|
Edited by - yogibear on Feb 27 2008 08:17:50 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 28 2008 : 07:37:12 AM
|
Hi yb
quote:
And in this respect, one level of interpretating Krishnamurti's statement, "The observer is the observed" is this.
Yes. Everything in our life is coloured by the clouds of our minds, so in a sense we entirely create our own worlds. And, because our sense of self is also clouded by the mind, we entirely create ourselves too, within our self made world.
Until the clouds begin to part, and then we see what has always been there. The shine.
Christi |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Feb 28 2008 : 07:49:13 AM
|
Hi Christi:
quote:
Yes. Everything in our life is coloured by the clouds of our minds, so in a sense we entirely create our own worlds. And, because our sense of self is also clouded by the mind, we entirely create ourselves too, within our self made world.
Until the clouds begin to part, and then we see what has always been there. The shine.
Well said.
From the book, Yoga and Destiny by Yesudian and Haich:
"In no case should we imagine that Yogis are sour-faced and other-worldly. They are simply men and women who have been healed of all mental and physical ills--completely healthy people! They have overcome all earthly troubles, problems and sorrows. They are free of bitterness, injured vanity, false pride and ambition, jealousy, and unsatisfied desire for wealth. So why should they be cross or sour? Knowing the whole gamut of human weakness, they have a delighful sense of humour, and with their sunny disposition, they radiate pure joy and happiness to all around them."
Best, yb.
|
Edited by - yogibear on Feb 28 2008 07:54:21 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Feb 29 2008 : 07:10:19 AM
|
Hi yb and all,
This is a quote which helps me to distinguish between what is self (relative) and what is Self (absolute):
Everything in your world is unreal, everything in my world is real.
Sri Nisargadatta.
For some reason that helps me get a handle on it.
Much love
Christi
|
Edited by - Christi on Feb 29 2008 07:20:27 AM |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Feb 29 2008 : 08:54:30 AM
|
From the book Self Inquiry by Yogani:
"With the rising presence of the witness, the entire
dynamic of self-inquiry changes. Then we are choosing
between that which is object (things, ideas, emotions)
and that which is subject (witness, Self). And that kind
of choosing is not a doing at all. It is a letting go.
As the witness becomes more and more abiding and
we come to know ourselves as That, unshaken and
separate from all of our experiences, including our own
thoughts, then we are finally in the position to make
choices that will unwind the habitual identification with
experiences and the dream we have been in up until
now.
Dispassion is not a doing at all, and is beyond self inquiry
itself. It isn’t even a letting go, for it is beyond
choice. Dispassion is a state of being. It is the subject
(the witness, our sense of Self) developed through an
integration of practices to the point where all the
objects of experience are taken in stride, without
identification. This applies to events, relationships, and
all that is going on in the body, heart and mind."
I can see the potential of establishing these habits in my nervous system.
In this sense, the establishment of the witness is simply the establishment of a couple of habits (like any others) in your nervous system, a rewiring, disconnecting the cortex from the limbic system or at least changing their relationship and habitual way of interacting.
Meditation and self inquiry are essentially like smoking. They are habits you are developing. Nervous reflexes. In the same way you can plasticize the brain to effortlessly reach for a cigarette, you can plasticize it to 'gently favor the mantra' and 'let go into the silence.' These circuits can become so dominant and wide spread that they become your normal and fundamental modus operandi.
The development of these habits from unconscious incompetence thru conscious incompetence to conscious competence is the prewitness, witness and discrimination stages and the complete establishment to unconscious competence is the state of dispassion.
Neurologically, when a nerve circuit is developed to a point where the habit has become established and no longer requires conscious attention or effort, it is under the direction of a different part of the motor cortex than that involved in the first three stages, and this creates an incredible freedom in the cortical areas associated with awareness.
The establishment of the 'gently favoring the mantra' and 'letting go into the silence' habits is perhaps the most difficult because they are contrary to an incredibly well established brain circuitry and straight jacket habit we already have: holding on. But the great thing and truth about neuroplasticity is that the more you fire a particular nerve circuit the stronger it gets and the less you fire a nerve circuit the weaker it gets. Exactly like building up and breaking down a muscle.
Maybe reducing all this to a couple of simple mental habits resulting from the firing of nerve circuits is a not 100% accurate and a little on the clunky side, but it is one way of looking at it and getting a handle on it.
Best, yb. |
Edited by - yogibear on Feb 29 2008 09:05:14 AM |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Feb 29 2008 : 09:08:36 AM
|
Just read your post, Christi.
quote:
Christi wrote:
For some reason that helps me get a handle on it.
quote:
yb wrote:
Maybe reducing all this to a couple of simple mental habits resulting from the firing of nerve circuits is a not 100% accurate and a little on the clunky side, but it is one way of looking at it and getting a handle on it.
Funny.
Best yb. |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Feb 29 2008 : 4:50:56 PM
|
Hi Christi,
quote:
Christi wrote:
This is a quote which helps me to distinguish between what is self (relative) and what is Self (absolute):
Everything in your world is unreal, everything in my world is real.
Sri Nisargadatta.
I don't get it. Would you explain it a little bit, please?
Thank you, yb. |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 01 2008 : 01:09:37 AM
|
Hi yb,
quote:
Hi Christi,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christi wrote:
This is a quote which helps me to distinguish between what is self (relative) and what is Self (absolute):
Everything in your world is unreal, everything in my world is real.
Sri Nisargadatta.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't get it. Would you explain it a little bit, please?
Thank you, yb.
Yes, Nisargadatta was talking to one of his students, and the student was asking him to explain what is real and what is not (a discussion which has taken place in this forum recently in a few threads). Nisargadatta replied by saying: "Everything in your world is not real, everything in my world is real".
For me, this helps to explain the quantum leap in the transition between what we call ordinary consciousness (identification with the relative self of the mind), and the realization that our true nature is the absolute, or supreme self (the awake state).
When we identify with the mind, as a limited contracted amalgam of physical, emotional and mental processes, our whole world is unreal, and everything in it is unreal.
When we see that we are absolute, pure being, then we are That which is real, and everything in our world is real, as That.
So the difference between the Self and the self is the difference between living in reality, and living in a dream. Yogani mentions the word "dream" in the quote in your last post. Jesus was a little bit harsher:
"Leave the dead to bury the dead and follow me"
For Jesus, everyone in the world was so asleep, that they were effectively dead, until they woke up and would, in his words "become Sons and Daughters of God".
It means that yoga clashes quite badly with postmodern relativism, which is the meme that we in the west are struggling to rise out of. For one who is awake, there is only one reality, which is always true, and any perception which is not based in That, as That, is ignorance (avidya) and has no relevance to Truth (satya). That is why Nisargadatta can say to someone: "Everything in your world is not real".
It is more than just a worldcentric view, it is more like a Kosmos-centric view, and is the ultimate form of holism, as it does not only include all (in the kosmos) as equals, but it includes all as its very own Divine being.
Christi
|
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Mar 01 2008 : 08:45:35 AM
|
Hi Christi,
quote:
Christi wrote:
For me, this helps to explain the quantum leap in the transition between what we call ordinary consciousness (identification with the relative self of the mind), and the realization that our true nature is the absolute, or supreme self (the awake state).
Your explanantion reminded me of the following from the book Sexual Energy and Yoga by Elisabeth Haich:
"This state is activated by manifested in man's consciousness by his becoming more awake. He begins to live! Only now does he notice that hitherto he has hardly lived. He did not live, he merely vegetated, his life was a farce. He breathed, ate and drank, even worked, but he always had the feeling that he did not participate in life - that he had no share in it - everything seemed to him like a dream, usually like a bad dream. He was not there now. He was not awake.
Now man begins to come alive, to grow conscious, to liberate himself from time and space. He begins to feel the fire of life within himself. Now he suddenly understands what Christ meant when he called some people 'dead' and some 'living'.
One can only speak in similes: expressions like: 'being awake', 'growing more conscious than hitherto', 'to come alive', and so forth, are substitutes for a non-existant more adequate vocabulary. The best way of putting it is perhaps as follows: however convinced we may be that we were awake, conscious and living, we nevertheless only awake through the higher frequencies of creative power, and see then that we have been neither awake, conscious nor living, but that we have vegetated and led an unreal life.
Just as, while we are dreaming, we are convinced that we are 'awake' and 'living', in our dream-visions, and we only realize that we have been dreaming when we 'wake up' to our normal consciousness, in the same way we only realize that we have hitherto led a dream-life - a shadow-life - when we gradually waken through the effect of the 'dragon-fire'(transformed sexual energy).
When we experience this 'awakening', we cannot understand how we ever believed that we were awake and living.....We live in an intensified and sublime state. This state is not one of hysteria and paroxysm. On the contrary, we are in an intensified, clear, lucid, spiritual state of consciousness, and are much calmer than before....In the spiritually elevated state, our calmness, control and objectivity are in comparably greater than previously in the normal state. Precisely because we are 'here now', we are 'with ourselves' to a much greater extent than we would ever have thought possible. In the spirtually illumined, awake state we are calmness, self-control itself. We are our own master, our own Self. That is true presence of mind, which we can sustain continuously as normal consciousness beyond the period of meditation. In this state we have no conscience, because we have become the conscience itself.....
The truly spiritual states are very easy: one is simply here now! And completely awake, as awake as the clear light of the sun! This bright light is experienced in a perfectly clear, transparent conscious state of being as: I AM! We do not even think these two words, we are that without thinking words!
One is so closely bound up with the present that the thoughts, always linking past with future, cannot penetrate this continuous present. One automatically disconnects one self from time and space.....
We must try to rise from the stage we are at. That is the most important thing of all. To rise.
quote:
Christi wrote:
For Jesus, everyone in the world was so asleep, that they were effectively dead, until they woke up and would, in his words "become Sons and Daughters of God".
Haich says that this is the phrase the Eygptians who created their original culture used to refer to themselves.
I am in a kind of curious state right now(I know I am not alone). I know what it is to be awake(not completely but significantly more than normal). I know that I am not awake or less awake. So I am kind of awake in my sleep. I know what I need to do to become awake again and even more than before. It is just a matter of 'time' and practice. I am OK with that.
The thing is that, what is real for me is real, it is not unreal. To think it is unreal, and that it doesn't need to be dealt with, is not at all practical. Therefore, it is real. I am real and my experience is real, even tho from another perspective it may truly be unreal. Doesn't matter. From my perspective, it is really real. Incredibly real. It had better be real. I have to pay the bills.
When that perspective changes, it will still be me, but with a different perspective, in a different state of consciousness, not a different me. My experience is always real, I am always myself, even if I am not completely myself and things can be more real than they all ready are, and somebody else experiences it this way and tells me that it is so. Or I have experienced it to be so, and have a memory of it. I have to accept things as they are, to deal with things as they are, from my present state of consciousness.
So I can except, conceptually, that my life is unreal and that my present self concept is a fiction, but but it does not have real world applicability for me and I do not experience it that way. When I experience it the way you or Yogani or Nisargadatta or others here experience it, then that will be real to me.
quote:
Christi wrote:
It means that yoga clashes quite badly with postmodern relativism, which is the meme that we in the west are struggling to rise out of. For one who is awake, there is only one reality, which is always true, and any perception which is not based in That, as That, is ignorance (avidya) and has no relevance to Truth (satya). That is why Nisargadatta can say to someone: "Everything in your world is not real".
I am not familiar with the concept of post modern relativism (would you give me a definition?) and I do not presently experience reality from the perspective of the Self, so I am presently doubly ignorant.
quote:
Christi wrote:
When we identify with the mind, as a limited contracted amalgam of physical, emotional and mental processes, our whole world is unreal, and everything in it is unreal.
But to me, what I experience presently is real and is God. It will never not be, even tho my experience of it may change and become more complete and truer.
I think these words from "Light on the Path' somehow apply:
"1. Kill out ambition.
"2. Kill out desire for life.
"3. Kill out desire for comfort.
"4. Work as thse work who are ambitious. Respect life as those who desire it. Be happy as those are who live for happiness."
Again, paradox.
Best, yb. |
Edited by - yogibear on Mar 01 2008 11:45:11 AM |
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Mar 01 2008 : 11:29:08 AM
|
I just wanted to add this to the discussion in relation to Samadhi. Nirvikalpa and Saharaj or the silent witness. Both are the same thing.
"...but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot." John 21: 11,12
Mary was the one who He had cast out seven demons from before. In other words, her nervous system was purified and so she was in Samadhi. Christ didn't literally appear before her, it was symbolic of the dream state.
----------------------
"From the sixth to the eighth weeks after the Enlightenment the Buddha spent his time going back and forth between the Bodhi Tree and the goat-herds' banyan tree."
Budha didn't need to walk back and forth between trees, but was showing his knowing of the dream world and the interconnectiveness between both.
http://www.geocities.com/jiji_muge/...m.html?20081
---------------------------
Picture of the Bodhi Tree:
http://www.the-tree.org.uk/Sacred%2...athmandu.jpg
See how the Bodhi appears to have no roots, while the common banyan does. Buddha was showing that he was aware of the silent witness, as was Christ, who used the analogy of two angels, one at the foot and the other at the head, both angels, both trees figs. No distinction whatsover. Just different manner of teaching.
Each were also aware of each other (symbolically speaking), but decided what was best for the generation at the time. Buddha could have easily taught the same way as Christ, through the coloring of dream symbolism, but decided that it would be best to speak without metaphor.
Christ supported Buddha, the silent witness to silent witness, as yogani says, by speaking plainly to Nathanael, 'I saw you while you were under the fig tree... happy are those who believe and do not see', instead of using parable. Buddha supported Christ by the action of going back and forth between the Bodhi and bayan tree by way of using his body as the metaphor/picture. Neither was necessary, but it was for the greater good to show their mutual support to observers and was relational to the path of Samadhi.
The same silent witness is explained here:
"Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem...
In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning but didn't find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see." He said to them, "How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!"
LOL, the two angels were really them, but they didn't know it at the time, but when it was explained plainly a sudden realization took place:
"Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight."
Also, I want to make it clear that I speak of Christ and Buddha in the sense of the silent witness, not the coloring of who they were/are by religion or students, without attachment to superstitious dogma, nor literal thinking.
VIL
|
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Mar 02 2008 : 04:49:05 AM
|
quote:
I am in a kind of curious state right now(I know I am not alone). I know what it is to be awake(not completely but significantly more than normal). I know that I am not awake or less awake. So I am kind of awake in my sleep. I know what I need to do to become awake again and even more than before. It is just a matter of 'time' and practice. I am OK with that.
You are certainly not alone in this state, Yogibear! I found that description very nicely put!
quote:
The thing is that, what is real for me is real, it is not unreal. To think it is unreal, and that it doesn't need to be dealt with, is not at all practical. Therefore, it is real. I am real and my experience is real, even tho from another perspective it may truly be unreal. Doesn't matter. From my perspective, it is really real. Incredibly real. It had better be real. I have to pay the bills.
Yes, that is how it is perceived from the mind. That's where stress, pain and discomfort comes from. The belief it's for real. I also fall into that trap often! That's where self-inquiry comes in for me. To do The Work or any other kind of self-inquiry is what might bring me back to the perspective of the Real. I immediately laugh at the Unreal and how seriously I lived the dream as if it was True, when in fact it was... just a dream! Do you really have to pay the bills? I would have said yes before, just as I would have said "I have to go to work every day". After this experience I'm not so sure...:
http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic....page=2#29270
What if you don't have to pay the bills? What if you can totally relax and let stillness in action pay the bills for you!?!? The reason you don't yet dare to let go of the control over the bills getting payed properly is the functioning of the mind. The last thing the mind wants to do is to let go of CONTROL and TRUST LIFE, trust that life happens FOR you without you having to do anything. Life lives itself effortlessly, but we think we have to live it with effort as long as we are in our separated little self. If you haven't read Adyashantis "Emptiness dancing" I'd strongly suggest to read that one. It's the only book I have seen that describes this "middle land" state where you know you are "kind of awake in your sleep"! It was such a relief to see someone describe it the way Adyashanti does! I wrote about it here:
http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic....OPIC_ID=3132
/emc, sleepy
|
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Mar 02 2008 : 07:23:45 AM
|
"One day the Buddha met an ascetic who sat by the bank of a river. This ascetic had practised austerities for 25 years. The Buddha asked him what he had received for all his labor. The ascetic proudly replied that, now at last, he could cross the river by walking on the water. The Buddha pointed out that this gain was insignificant for all the years of labor, since he could cross the river using a ferry for one penny!"
http://www.angelfire.com/indie/anna.../meduim.html
I have no affiliation with the wanderer nor his perspecitve on various truths, but loved this story, since it's applicable to this discussion.
If we are able to work, work. If not, then find another means to take the stress off of the mind if bills pile up. Maybe debt assistance, unemployment, bankruptsy, whatever. 'God helps those who help themselves'.
It doesn't mean that bills will or will not be paid, since trusting or letting go is spoken from the perspective without outcome. The reason why Adyashanti says, 'it is beyond a mystical experience' and yogani explains the practicality of bringing enlightenment within the mundane. So one may say, 'let go' or 'trust this', but it's spoken from a different level of perception that is also practical. And has more to do with willingness.
Maybe someone is willing to leave everything behind and spend twenty five years only to realize that he can walk on water. But how is that helping another around him/her? See the point that Buddha is making? Kind of like saying, 'Boy, that's some gift you got there, hmm, it's really some thing... Btw, all you had to do is take a boat. And you wasted, what? Twenty five years? Wow, you are truly someone realized': LOLOLOL See the difference between the imagination and reality?
Enlightened souls work, some not, wives, some not, significant others, some not, kids, some not, parents, some not, bills, some not, have sex, some not, masturbate, some not, eat pork, some not, fast, some not et al: LOLOLOL
Take care:
VIL
|
Edited by - VIL on Mar 02 2008 07:54:53 AM |
|
|
|
emc
2072 Posts |
Posted - Mar 02 2008 : 08:10:00 AM
|
| VIL, just a short comment - I'm not saying one shouldn't work. I´m chiming in on the subject of the thread - the difference between self and Self, unreal and Real. If the self gets stressed to pay the bills... well, it's just a shift in perspective and then... Self goes to work and pays the bills. So it's like, the paying of bills remain. I don't. Not the self who had the ability to get stressed and thought is was all for real. When it's realized as unreal - stillness pays the bills for the fun of it. Stillness in action. And it was IT paying the bills all along, even though the self thought it was it doing it... |
Edited by - emc on Mar 02 2008 08:14:04 AM |
|
|
|
VIL
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - Mar 02 2008 : 12:17:14 PM
|
I apologize, emc, sometimes things just come off of the top of my head and we're probably speaking of the same thing, but I'll post it anyway, since it's always perfect:  LOLOL
Okay, a physical action has a deeper meaning within itself. Just like a literal dream. It may seem commonplace, but the very thing that someone does will actually assist with uprooting of internal samskaras. Some do this naturally, while with others it's a process. So if it's difficult the best thing to do is to actually engage yourself within the dream, or without witness, take physical action.
In Samadhi this is what they mean by the term "going down within the basement" or engaging the dream to retrain the body/mind out of habit or coloring. This puts one in the moment who worries about bills or any thing, nervousness or whatever. It's more effective than to shift the awareness if someone doesn't know what awareness is - or if they are begging the question, "What is the Self?" See what I mean?
Again, the reason that it's difficult is that the person has not established the witness and cannot perceive the dream. If they had they would know the silent witness, without needing to ask the difference between the two and that's okay, it's beautiful to ask questions, we all do and all learn. Perfection is endless.
Anyway, so this very action is also effective with Samadhi, and people who experience this, know this.
The reason this is effective is that this conscious willingness to debase yourself for another person within the physical dream, number one: Helps people from the sheer weight of samadhi (whether aware or not)Two: Is not interfering with karma, because one's noble intention is free from karma (experiencing samadhi shows this). Three: It retrains the body/mind by saying within yourself, 'It doesn't matter what happens from this encounter good or bad' Or from the perspective of Samadhi (I know it's a dream, but I will abstract my perception and look beyond the facad). It may start out as acting, but will end up not so.
It is the willingness to break free from outcome or not knowing what will happen, by acting yourself yourself out of the mental habit.
Now all things are really internal, we know this, but not everyone does, since the witness is not present.
So what ends up happening is that the person begins to realize that positive results are confirmed from the outside world without rhyme or reason. The person who was willing to take another job, ends up not having to, since things just take care of themselves seemingly from out of the blue. Just from the fact that they let go of outcome. It seems impossible. It's unreal. It's false.
Anyway, one cannot think himself/herself there, but have to take the external action, until the mental process(it is a process even though it doesn't appear so), or internal willingness of letting go of outcome is developed, so that it is not difficult at all to percieve the silent witness and be within the moment.
Take care:
VIL
|
Edited by - VIL on Mar 02 2008 12:31:58 PM |
|
|
|
Katrine
Norway
1813 Posts |
Posted - Mar 02 2008 : 1:18:38 PM
|
Christi wrote:
quote:
Yes, Nisargadatta was talking to one of his students, and the student was asking him to explain what is real and what is not (a discussion which has taken place in this forum recently in a few threads). Nisargadatta replied by saying: "Everything in your world is not real, everything in my world is real".
What stirred in me was this: "Oh! He means that everything "other than" will always be unreal!" I see of course that this student was not awake like Nisargadatta....but this is not the whole point. It is not necessarily that this student is living in an unreal world per se. There are always degrees....it is infinite, remember? Nisargadatta could have spoken to an enlightened man....and the answer would be the same: Everything in your world is unreal.....simply because for it to be real, I have to taste it myself, be it myself. I have to be you to know what is real for you. And I am not! I am forever me (in this case - the absolute). There is only one of me. There always was only one of me.
Just my norwegian krone..... |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4514 Posts |
Posted - Mar 03 2008 : 01:39:42 AM
|
Hi Yb, Vil, emc and Katrine
quote:
“yb wrote:
I am not familiar with the concept of post modern relativism (would you give me a definition?)”
Postmodern relativism is the idea that everyone’s view of the world is real and equally valid because it is real for them. Postmodern relativism seeks to be inclusory, but only on the level of the mind (everyone’s mental concepts/ viewpoints are given equal validity). Yoga is inclusory on the level of reality (beyond the mind and mental creations). Everyone’s mental concepts are denied validity in terms of being ultimate truth, but everyone is given validity as a being of Divine Light, and a part of ultimate Truth, and invited to participate in the single thing that is really happening (awakeness).
quote:
“yb wrote:
The development of these habits from unconscious incompetence thru conscious incompetence to conscious competence is the pre-witness, witness and discrimination stages and the complete establishment to unconscious competence is the state of dispassion.”
I agree. Nisargadatta used to say that in the awakened state his life went on quite automatically without him being aware of it. What you could call unconscious competence.
quote:
“yb wrote:
Your explanation reminded me of the following from the book Sexual Energy and Yoga by Elisabeth Haich:
"This state is activated by manifested in man's consciousness by his becoming more awake. He begins to live! Only now does he notice that hitherto he has hardly lived. He did not live, he merely vegetated, his life was a farce. He breathed, ate and drank, even worked, but he always had the feeling that he did not participate in life - that he had no share in it - everything seemed to him like a dream, usually like a bad dream. He was not there now. He was not awake.
Now man begins to come alive, to grow conscious, to liberate himself from time and space. He begins to feel the fire of life within himself. Now he suddenly understands what Christ meant when he called some people 'dead' and some 'living'.”
I have not read anything yet by Elizabeth Haich, but it is interesting to see that she describes things in a very similar way to the way I describe them. Maybe we are all one?
quote:
“Yb quoting Haich:
One can only speak in similes: expressions like: 'being awake', 'growing more conscious than hitherto', 'to come alive', and so forth, are substitutes for a non-existent more adequate vocabulary.”
Also: "born again"... "resurrected".
quote:
yb wrote:
I am in a kind of curious state right now (I know I am not alone). I know what it is to be awake (not completely but significantly more than normal). I know that I am not awake or less awake. So I am kind of awake in my sleep. I know what I need to do to become awake again and even more than before. It is just a matter of 'time' and practice. I am OK with that.
Yes. Yogani pointed out in a recent thread that any level of realization will not last long if it is not supported by a corresponding transformation on the neurobiological level. I believe that it is the rising of the kundalini to the crown, and the stabilizing of it there that is necessary for the witness consciousness to become a stable and naturally abiding state (the stage of dispassion).
And when the dynamics of the kundalini expand outwards from the head, to encompass the heart, then the expansion into unity consciousness as a permanent reality becomes possible:
Yogani wrote (in the addition to lesson 108):
"The experience of the union of inner silence/Shiva and ecstasy/Shakti is ecstatic bliss, with the focal point of it in the head. When this joining expands from the head down into the heart area, the experience becomes one of outpouring divine love. This is why enlightened sages are an endless source of love and compassion. Their hearts are in a constant state of melting due to the divine union going on continuously inside. This corresponds with the highest stage of enlightenment, where all is seen and profoundly loved as an integral part of Self. At this level of functioning in the human nervous system, there is the divine power to aid healing and spiritual transformation in everyone near and far.”
quote:
yb wrote:
“When that perspective changes, it will still be me, but with a different perspective, in a different state of consciousness, not a different me. My experience is always real, I am always myself,....
Yogani says in the Self-inquiry book that at some stage, the “I Am” becomes “Am”, because the “I” as a separate reference point dissolves.
Nisargadatta said a similar thing. When speaking to one of his students he said:
”People exist in your world only, they do not exist in mine.”
So maybe you will not always be “you”. This is another sign (nimitta) by which the absolute state (or Self) can be easily recognized... other people (as personalities) simply no longer exist.
quote:
“yb wrote:
When I experience it the way you or Yogani or Nisargadatta or others here experience it, then that will be real to me.”
I don’t think you should compare me with Yogani or Nisargadatta. They are Great Masters, whereas I am just a student of yoga, with a tendency to overanalyze.
As you, I have had awakening experiences, glimpses of truth, enough to know there is something real, which is of a higher order, or magnitude of existence. And some of that joy, and peace, and silence is filtering into my life for which I am extremely grateful.
I experience what is called sahaja samadhi (spontaneously arising samadhi) quite often these days (usually several times a day outside of meditation). I guess sahaja samadhi is what Yogani refers to as the dispassion stage, as there is no choosing between what is real and what is not, just a simple resting in the joy of the present moment (the joy of being. It is what Haich calls “an intensified and sublime state” in your quote from her above. I experience ecstasy and bliss most of the time now. I also usually experience equanimity, peace and a kind of euphoria, or benediction. When my heart chakra is open, which is quite often, I experience unconditional love of the heart (love which arises spontaneously without any object or cause). But I am beginning to see that there is another kind of love, which is based in unity consciousness (beyond the witness). Nisargadatta explains it here:
“ I am itself is God. The seeking itself is God. In seeking you discover you are neither the body nor the mind, and the love of the self in you is for the self in all. The two are one. The consciousness in you and the consciousness in me, apparently two, really one, seek unity and that is love.” (From: I am That p67)
This seems to be the love that Jesus knew and taught. Loving another not just because your heart is open, but also because your self is their self. It brings a whole new light to the only commandment Jesus gave:
“Love your neighbour as yourself...”
Christi
|
Edited by - Christi on Mar 03 2008 02:07:20 AM |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Mar 03 2008 : 08:46:29 AM
|
Good morning, emc,
A partial response for you:
quote:
Emc wrote:
You are certainly not alone in this state, Yogibear! I found that description very nicely put!
Thanks, emc. It is great to find a community of people who are more or less awake!
Emc, I read the thread where you talk about all the bad things in the world. It reminds me of a conversation that I have with Christians in my mind once in a while regarding the omnipotence of God.
I think, if God is all powerful then all the bad that happens is from God and the devil is God’s agent. And all the bad things that happen are God’s will. Otherwise, God cannot be all powerful as the devil would be a power outside of God which negates the condition of omnipotence.
More to come.
Best, yb. |
Edited by - yogibear on Mar 03 2008 08:54:33 AM |
|
|
|
Ananda
3115 Posts |
Posted - Mar 03 2008 : 09:38:42 AM
|
| great subject, the ashtavakra gita defines this philosophy in the best way there is. |
|
|
|
Balance
USA
967 Posts |
Posted - Mar 03 2008 : 10:29:27 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by beirut
great subject, the ashtavakra gita defines this philosophy in the best way there is.
That is such a beautiful gita, thank you. Here is a passage:
"I am like the ocean, and the multiplicity of objects is comparable to a wave. To know this is knowledge, and then there is neither renunciation, acceptance or cessation of it. 6.2" |
|
|
|
yogibear
409 Posts |
Posted - Mar 03 2008 : 1:14:38 PM
|
Hi emc,
And I might add, awake people who share alot of the same/similar ideas and interests as a result.
From the book Emptiness Dancing by Adyashanti:
"The taste of no separate self is totally liberating. 'no separate self' does not mean there is a spiritual experience that goes something like, ' have extended myself infinitely everywhere, and have merged with everything.' That's a beautiful, wonderful experience for a separate self to have, but that's not what Oneness is. Oneness is not merging. Merging happens between two and since there is only one, any experience of merging is one illusion merging with another, as beautiful and wonderful as that experience may be. Even when I experience having merged with the absolute, with the infinte, with God, it simply means that my fictitious self has merged with another fiction. Mystical experiences aren't enlightenment."
Yes, those generic, knock off, counterfeit experiences, imitations of the real thing. Tricky, deceptive perhaps. Still of the mind, not having transcended the mind into AMness.
For me that is where having an adequete conceptual map of the territory of spiritual development is essential to understand what is happening, to keep everything in perspective, to keep every thing in its proper place, to help stay oriented and on track.
Tolle talks about this, too.
I can at least have an idea of what they are getting at.
Hi Balance and beirut,
I remember a quote from that gita that was in Miracle of Love by Ram Dass. To paraphrase, it was something like, "This is truth, this is wisdom. Now do as you please."
I always liked that.
Best, yb.
|
Edited by - yogibear on Mar 03 2008 1:35:04 PM |
|
|
|
Sparkle
Ireland
1457 Posts |
Posted - Mar 03 2008 : 2:29:05 PM
|
quote:
"The taste of no separate self is totally liberating. 'no separate self' does not mean there is a spiritual experience that goes something like, ' have extended myself infinitely everywhere, and have merged with everything.' That's a beautiful, wonderful experience for a separate self to have, but that's not what Oneness is. Oneness is not merging. Merging happens between two and since there is only one, any experience of merging is one illusion merging with another, as beautiful and wonderful as that experience may be. Even when I experience having merged with the absolute, with the infinte, with God, it simply means that my fictitious self has merged with another fiction. Mystical experiences aren't enlightenment."
Thanks YB, I really like that |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
In the sky of your mind you are the 
