Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Complicated...or Simple?
federica
Seeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
Bear with me, please, this is a little long....
Now I know that many of you might have reached this bit already, and realised this for yourselves ages ago... but you know how it is....
Sometimes, something just doesn't hit you or have meaning for you, until it's expressed in a way that just goes 'click' and flicks the switch. I guess that's why the Buddha had to approach different people in different ways....
I was having difficulty with the term 'collective consciousness', and the process of inter-connectedness, and how we're all the same... I had it, kind of, and I understood it, but it hadn't really sunk in... I didn't disbelieve it... I just didn't know how to make it 'work' for me...
Then, on another forum, I began a discussion (amongst non-buddhists, but all people in the 'Self-Improvement' forum...) on stripping away all the labels, and therefore examining what was left...
I received quite a few protests about how important labels are, and how unique they make us, and how we need them to function in society, and how proud we should be of them...
I tried to explain that I wasn't suggesting they were negative, or had to be discarded, and dismissed as unimportant or bad, as such... just that we should recognise them as definitions of what we are, not who we are...
I wanted to go in and ask the following...
Instead of celebrating the labels, and see just how much they render us as unique and individual, why not try to look at it the othe way around....
When we strip everything away, and discard (or lay aside) all the labels we accumulate over our lives... what is there left that is common to all of us...?
What is it that unites us on an equal level...?
And this is where I, myself, began to 'get it'....
I have been reading Pema Chodron's "The Places that Scare You"
and I read a line yesterday, that resonated with me.
"Suffering is the product of an Aggressive mind."
I realised she didn't mean 'aggressive' as in violent, necessarily. She meant 'aggressive' as in negatively energetic (like for example, an aggressive form of cancer....).
Then, on another page, I read that,
"Suffering and Aggression are the fruits of Ignorance.
What is it that we 'Ignore'?
we Ignore our kinship with others."
Something was beginning to sink in...
I then took it a step futher, and turned it around....
I calculated that -
'Joy is the product of a Passive Mind.
Joy and Peace are the fruits of awakening.
What is it that we awaken to?
We awaken to our inter-connectedness.'
It is the definition of our Selves, devoid of any and every label: - woman, man, monk, doctor, sheepish, handicapped, british, tired, electrician, tanned, blue-eyed - that is the essence that is interconnected with everyone else. Stripped of any form of Ego, we all share one Boundless Mind.
so when I connect with someone, I might be looking at a 43-year old, brown-haired, green-eyed, taxi driver, wearing a deep blue suit, and father of three kids, owner of a three-bedroom house and four dogs...
but all I am actually connecting with, is in essence something that is already 'me'.
I am connecting with something that has no form, shape or definition, but is the very vital matter that binds us all inexorably together.
The Formless, Voidness that is filled to the brim with all that is.
Ker-bling!!
so Simple!!
Sooooo Complicated!!
Now I know that many of you might have reached this bit already, and realised this for yourselves ages ago... but you know how it is....
Sometimes, something just doesn't hit you or have meaning for you, until it's expressed in a way that just goes 'click' and flicks the switch. I guess that's why the Buddha had to approach different people in different ways....
I was having difficulty with the term 'collective consciousness', and the process of inter-connectedness, and how we're all the same... I had it, kind of, and I understood it, but it hadn't really sunk in... I didn't disbelieve it... I just didn't know how to make it 'work' for me...
Then, on another forum, I began a discussion (amongst non-buddhists, but all people in the 'Self-Improvement' forum...) on stripping away all the labels, and therefore examining what was left...
I received quite a few protests about how important labels are, and how unique they make us, and how we need them to function in society, and how proud we should be of them...
I tried to explain that I wasn't suggesting they were negative, or had to be discarded, and dismissed as unimportant or bad, as such... just that we should recognise them as definitions of what we are, not who we are...
I wanted to go in and ask the following...
Instead of celebrating the labels, and see just how much they render us as unique and individual, why not try to look at it the othe way around....
When we strip everything away, and discard (or lay aside) all the labels we accumulate over our lives... what is there left that is common to all of us...?
What is it that unites us on an equal level...?
And this is where I, myself, began to 'get it'....
I have been reading Pema Chodron's "The Places that Scare You"
and I read a line yesterday, that resonated with me.
"Suffering is the product of an Aggressive mind."
I realised she didn't mean 'aggressive' as in violent, necessarily. She meant 'aggressive' as in negatively energetic (like for example, an aggressive form of cancer....).
Then, on another page, I read that,
"Suffering and Aggression are the fruits of Ignorance.
What is it that we 'Ignore'?
we Ignore our kinship with others."
Something was beginning to sink in...
I then took it a step futher, and turned it around....
I calculated that -
'Joy is the product of a Passive Mind.
Joy and Peace are the fruits of awakening.
What is it that we awaken to?
We awaken to our inter-connectedness.'
It is the definition of our Selves, devoid of any and every label: - woman, man, monk, doctor, sheepish, handicapped, british, tired, electrician, tanned, blue-eyed - that is the essence that is interconnected with everyone else. Stripped of any form of Ego, we all share one Boundless Mind.
so when I connect with someone, I might be looking at a 43-year old, brown-haired, green-eyed, taxi driver, wearing a deep blue suit, and father of three kids, owner of a three-bedroom house and four dogs...
but all I am actually connecting with, is in essence something that is already 'me'.
I am connecting with something that has no form, shape or definition, but is the very vital matter that binds us all inexorably together.
The Formless, Voidness that is filled to the brim with all that is.
Ker-bling!!
so Simple!!
Sooooo Complicated!!
0
Comments
Why do you feel there needs to be a "something" that unites "us"?
Two more labels that you could try dumping - just for a wheeze.
Sanna Dhamma Anatta
Perhaps she means a mind moved by volitional impulses, anger, desire and so on.
Sanna Sankhara Dukkha
And keep sinking, sinking, transforming and sinking further...
Sanna Sankhara Anicca
Namaste
Kris
That's right, as said....
Yes, sure... but it's taken me years to reach this level....
time...
Give me time....
I know i do not have it as a guarantee, but I'm not going to rush this....
No probs. Let me know when you find it in meditation:winkc:
Don't you ever feel it?
...mmm I feel the force is strong in this one...
Oh go on, if you push me on it... but what we have to know is the nature of that field, so let's cut to the chase and discuss it.
As good God-fearin' Buddhists I think we can all agree that there is no individual Atman, or Soul. That there is no inherently existing 'self' - that such a designation is mere convention, (Prasangika) or it's all anatta (not self) Theravadan.
Okay?
So, who enters Nirvana - who experiences it?
Kris
I'm merely saying that I am able to directly connect wjth the pure essence that is consciousness... that we're all equipped with... this stream of boundless heart and energy that unites everyone.
I'm not referring to atman, souls or anything else like that.
You're confusing me with someone else...!!
Hey, As a disciple steeped in the ancient secret lore of the Tibetan Vajrayana and potential Dzogchenpa, I know you're not! I was just making a general point here - sort of getting that stuff out of the way up front so I could pop the question I did and prevent any dualistic pseudo-eternalists wading into our little chat with such sentiments.
So, If we know that there is no person as such, then...
who enters Nirvana - who experiences it?
You see, I think you are on to something with that "stream of boundless heart and energy that unites everyone".
So my question may look off topic, but it ain't - honest.
Anyone care to play?
Namaste
Kris
me and my attachments!! :banghead:
And that, is a good question...
I'll be away this weekend - ample opportunity to put my ego in order and to ponder....
deep metta to you and all! XX
Look forward to your musings next week then. Have a good one.
P.S. Other ppl can get involved too. :tonguec:
I just watched the movie Freedom Writers. It's kind of like a Dangerous Minds movie in that this teacher goes into an inner-city school and somehow manages to teach and change a LOT of kids who would normally drop out.
In the beginning of the movie, the kids have no interest in listening to anything she says because they perceive her as "other." They have been raised by gangs and in families that live by the motto "You must take care of your own." They have seen countless acts of violence that serve to enforce this view of the world as segregated and aggressive. The teacher does three main things to "hook them" and then teach them:
She approaches them in an equitable way, by making education relevant both in terms of objectives and expectations.
She consistently does nice things for them. She goes out of her way for them, even though at the beginning they treat her like crap. She is able to see that the way they treat her is not personal, but a reflection of the image of the world they have been given.
She shows them (not tells them) how they are similar to each other and all other people in the world.
What a weekend I have had!
if I was enthusiastic about Dogs before, I am passionate about them now!!
I don't want to go off-topic, but I might open a thread somewhere on our Buddha-buddies the animals!!
As an added bonus:
I get to my Hotel room, start putting my stuff away, open the drawer in the bedside table and - yup! There it is, as I expected - Gideon's Bible.
Together with a copy of "The Teachings of Buddha" published and distributed by Bukkyo Dendo Kyokkai (Society for the Promotion of Buddhism). With a label stuck in the front, stating that
'This is the property of the 'dah-de-dah' Hotel. please do not remove.'
Gobsmacked?
Just a bit....
Anyway, where were we....?
Hi Simon,
Nice quote. What's your take on it though?
Kris
"No words can describe it"
What have we got?
okay, so I guess that's Simon out of the thread.
interesting
not sure...
had any thoughts yourself?
I'll go make a cup of tea.
Why "who"?
....Why not ...."What?"
Are 'we' not beyond gender? Beyond form? Beyond identity?
'What enters Nirvana? What experiences this Entry?
And is it indeed something we would be able to respond to, in any satisfactory manner?
And if not, is it a waste of time tiring my poor knotted, simple and dense little mind over?
(No sugar for me.... thanks....)
No. 'We' are gender, form and identity. No gender, form & identity = No "We". There is no "We" separate from gender, form and identity that is able to "go beyond".
Depends. My take on it is as follows:
'No-body' ever 'gets into' Nirvana. 'No-one' ever 'attains' it, as being an objective observer precludes the state.
Nirvana is what is left after all (and I mean all) the dualistic dross of self and other is abandoned.
So, is it that which we always were beyond the three times? Could Nirvana be the "Universal Consciousness" which you "feel"?
It was just the frisson of a connective energy... something we all seemed to have in common, but that made us all unique and separate....
oh, blah, blah, blah.....!
The Buddha himself never answered these types of questions for two reasons. The first is that they are based upon faulty assumptions. The second is that they do not lead to the end of suffering. For example, when asked who experiences things such as feelings, craving, clinging, et cetera, the Buddha re-framed these questions in a way that was conducive to liberation, i.e., in terms of dependent co-arising. In other words, when answering the question of "who" or "what" experiences suffering, and consequently, the cessation of suffering, the Buddha speaks only in terms of conditionality—that which conditions the origination of suffering, and that which conditions its cessation (SN 12.12).
There is no mention of an "experiencer," only the complex process by which suffering arises and ceases. Essentially, it is up to the meditator to use these teachings as a guideline for observing their experience of the present moment in terms of the Four Noble Truths, and to perform the tasks associated with each, i.e., comprehend suffering, abandon its cause, realize its cessation, and develop the path to that cessation. As for asking who or what experiences nibbana, in the words of Thanissaro Bhikkhu, "Once there's the experience of such total freedom [i.e., nibbana], where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or whether or not it's a self?" (No-self or Not-self?).
Jason
Not necessarily! LOL
Hi federica,
Well IMHO you’re not wrong. Please don’t take my ‘not-self’ muttering as some kind of assertion that you are. One thing many ‘orthodox’ religions fail to address is exactly that which you are pointing at.
It’s like when you dream of a friend you haven’t seen for years and they call you out of the blue the next day, or like when you just somehow ‘know’ something but you can’t articulate or justify it.
These things have happened to me as well, so I’m with you on this. I agree ultimately, of course, with Jason’s excellent post, but suspect that it would fail to answer freddy’s question, so let’s rummage around a bit more. If we consider the corpus of Mahayana literature we will find they have had a fair old stab at it, especially within the Tibetan tenets system (not that I want to trawl through that stuff now).
But beyond the philosophical considerations of scholars there is a tradition of a ‘Universal Ground’ within the Higher schools, like Dzogchen. If you take a peek at Norbu’s Supreme Source there is much made of the Dharmakaya (they call it Samantrabhadra). Vajrayanists talk about the Clear Light and there are any number of other labels which refer to this ‘non-dual’ state.
This state is never understood to be ‘other’ than the consciousness which witnesses it and it is within such moments of non-dual abiding that gnosis may arise.
What has this got to do with Freddy’s original point? Intuitive knowledge is a kind of gnosis. It’s not objectively verifiable or logical but we ‘know’. All of my ‘mundane siddhis’ have occurred in moments of stillness, sort of when (for a split second) I step outside myself, or within the dream state - if that makes any sense?
So my point (and I think Freddy’s) is, that there is this ‘knowing’. Whilst we have to be careful not to posit some kind of eternal, unchanging universal ‘thing’, doesn’t outright denial bring the ‘final state’ uncomfortably close to the accepted Western scientific definition of clinical death?
Namaste
Kris
Anyone?
Whilst I think you have this absolutely bang on, I hope I need not clarify that in attempting to define that which i have concluded, I am of course not suggesting any type of 'Spirit', 'Soul' or 'Absolute-carbon-copy-of us' living essence....
It is precisely as Kris was saying... it's a 'knowing' a complete inner perfection... the Buddha Nature wrapped so far in, that it's sometimes hard to recognise....
Hi federica,
Yeah, I'm with you on that one. It's the eye of the hurricane. The "still-point of destruction, the centre of the fury", as someone once wrote.
This is why any intellectualization, labels and other such sankhara can never "contain" this place. They make useful servants but lousy masters. We should never fully put our necks into their noose.
Namaste
Kris
With the deepest and most respectful bow to Jason/Elohim, his words are always wise, researched and knowledgeable, but I confess, as I have done before, that their profound nature and wise teachings are occasionally lost on me because quite simply, I am not able to access them on a suitably intellectual level. I do not put myself down, or belittle my own intelligence in this; I am not stupid, or simple-minded, in the 'idiotic' or 'ignorant' senses of the word.
I am just not wired for this level of communication. I find other means of understanding - and propounding - information, far more in tune with my way of thinking and speaking. And I do not believe I am alone.
So this thread has done a great deal, in its simple context, to confirm much of what I had hitherto learnt and accepted.
Ah.
For example:
I am in a discussion currently, on another forum on dependent arising... This too screwed my cogs for a while... until I realised 'arising' was another way of talking about how something originates, or becomes and remains real in our eyes and minds.... and that for everything to exist, we must be giving it form or acknowledgement to exist.... and therefore, for us to exist, we must be interacting with it.. so consequently, as we have Form/No-Form, or Self/Not-self, everything else is dependent on us for the same status, and vice versa....
I think....
You see, what simple levels I must remain at in order for me to wrap my head around stuff?
So truly, Jason, I am really grateful to you for what you bring to me and others upon this forum - and elsewhere... but 'bearofverylittlebrain' doesn't cover it....Forgive me if I revert to such simple means, but - it's all I got, right now....
Thank you all, and thank you kris.... one who is demonstrably able to straddle 'both worlds' at once.
I need a cup of tea....!!
Sounds good to me :winkc:
Just don't try too hard to wrap your head around all that stuff.
Namaste
Kris
There is nothing wrong or inadequate with your level of understanding. Understanding just takes time.
Jason
Here is an interesting talk that I think applies to this topic.
Jason