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.
internalizing realization of emptiness
OtioseDodge
Explorer
Hi All,
I'm glad to have found this forum, and look forward to contributing and benefiting.
Up until recently, I had a bit of a conundrum that I think I've managed to solve, but I wanted to run it by this forum. I've basically understood the ultimate nature of reality on an intellectual level, but I still didn't understand how I could maintain this understanding on a constant basis. That is, even if I understood the ultimate nature of reality, what if some "external" event came along and made me temporarily forget this understanding, and thus made me believe that the event was ultimately real? For example, let's say a tiger came into my room right now. It's safe to say that though I'm almost convinced that it's ultimately not real and thus couldn't harm me (since I'm not ultimately real either!), I would still probably be carried away by terror and fear for my life, and thus not be able to hold my near-certainty about ultimate reality in my head.
My solution to this problem is the following: that we don't have to hold the cognitive construct of certainty about ultimate reality in our mind all the time. In the end, it's impossible to think of two things at once -- how are we supposed to do the laundry and remember that it's ultimately not real at the same time? Instead, I think we have to somehow make our realization become an emotional state. That is, I have to create the conditions which allow me to feel the truth of this analysis and the ensuing peace and bliss as constantly as possible. That way, when the tiger is in this room, though on a more superficial level I am afraid, underlying that fear is a deeper, more robust emotional state which is the deepest kind of reassurance that ultimately, this tiger can't harm me. So, while my past conditioning leads to a superficial and conditioned fear response, I take the situation lightly. (And who knows? Maybe with time it's possible to even eliminate our conditioned responses...)
Now, if this analysis is accurate, then I want to talk technique. How to achieve this emotional state in the most constant way possible? Is it just a question of remembering (cognitively) that ultimate reality is what it is and then resting in the resultant emotional state? Or are there other techniques out there that people know about?
Thanks for reading!
Best,
Otiose
I'm glad to have found this forum, and look forward to contributing and benefiting.
Up until recently, I had a bit of a conundrum that I think I've managed to solve, but I wanted to run it by this forum. I've basically understood the ultimate nature of reality on an intellectual level, but I still didn't understand how I could maintain this understanding on a constant basis. That is, even if I understood the ultimate nature of reality, what if some "external" event came along and made me temporarily forget this understanding, and thus made me believe that the event was ultimately real? For example, let's say a tiger came into my room right now. It's safe to say that though I'm almost convinced that it's ultimately not real and thus couldn't harm me (since I'm not ultimately real either!), I would still probably be carried away by terror and fear for my life, and thus not be able to hold my near-certainty about ultimate reality in my head.
My solution to this problem is the following: that we don't have to hold the cognitive construct of certainty about ultimate reality in our mind all the time. In the end, it's impossible to think of two things at once -- how are we supposed to do the laundry and remember that it's ultimately not real at the same time? Instead, I think we have to somehow make our realization become an emotional state. That is, I have to create the conditions which allow me to feel the truth of this analysis and the ensuing peace and bliss as constantly as possible. That way, when the tiger is in this room, though on a more superficial level I am afraid, underlying that fear is a deeper, more robust emotional state which is the deepest kind of reassurance that ultimately, this tiger can't harm me. So, while my past conditioning leads to a superficial and conditioned fear response, I take the situation lightly. (And who knows? Maybe with time it's possible to even eliminate our conditioned responses...)
Now, if this analysis is accurate, then I want to talk technique. How to achieve this emotional state in the most constant way possible? Is it just a question of remembering (cognitively) that ultimate reality is what it is and then resting in the resultant emotional state? Or are there other techniques out there that people know about?
Thanks for reading!
Best,
Otiose
0
Comments
What do you mean that ultimately nothing's real? o_o
Isn't it the same?
Besides... there is the Path. The Path to Nirvana and enlightenment. That is always going to be personal and magical and poetic. I don't know where all those whimsical, laughterfull, sorrowful moments equate on a "nature of reality" theory.
I disagree that it is even possible to understand the ultimate nature of reality by mere intellectualization. True understanding is not an intellectual type of understanding and does not involve the intellect at all IMO.
Me: I thought about it, and I've made a mistake. I meant to say that the only thing that ultimately exists is peace and bliss (not "conceptless peace"), because the ultimate can be successfully described as peace and bliss.
Valtiel: I don't get the difference either. How did you come to that conclusion through your analysis?
Me: I hope that what I said above clarifies things.
milkmoth, to answer you, I think that one can lead an excellent and socially useful life without this type of speculation. But I also think that philosophy can help to break through to the highest understanding and the unshakeable peace that you can hopefully transmit to others.
seeker242: I disagree that it is even possible to understand the ultimate nature of reality by mere intellectualization. True understanding is not an intellectual type of understanding and does not involve the intellect at all IMO.
Me: I agree with you that the ultimate nature of reality is beyond mere intellectualization. That said, I don't agree with your use of the word "understanding" when considering the ultimate nature of reality; I think that it's more a question of experiencing it, though "experiencing" isn't spot on, because it's a concept too! I also think that there plenty of intellectual indicators that can lead to the true understanding, but that it's important not to mistake the scaffolding for the house.
treederwright: i understand your dilema. I've tried to grasp this idea as well. What i recommend is to try and integrate wisdom with meditation and ethics. This will give practical experience with your ultimate realization.
Me: I'm glad you understand. Do you mind telling me some specific meditation practices that can help me at this stage? I realize that it may be better to ask a teacher about this, but I have a couple of months with a lot of free time and can't find a teacher yet.
Going about it backwards. Understanding emptiness STARTS as an emotional state. Otherwise, it's just a Western-style mind-game.
And yes, of course, if it's a mind-game thing, we temporarily forget it. Oh, been there, done that. Still trying to go about it backwards too, despite my fine-sounding words!!!
The very practice of Buddhism starts with learning to be comfortable with not understanding, and with not thinking we have to "fix" things that cause discomfort. We are all seeking "ground under our feet", as Pema Chodron says, and that is one of the ways we stay stuck in samsara.
The original text and the translation of it are far superior to Meditation on Emptiness.
And yes, of course, if it's a mind-game thing, we temporarily forget it. Oh, been there, done that. Still trying to go about it backwards too, despite my fine-sounding words!!!
The very practice of Buddhism starts with learning to be comfortable with not understanding, and with not thinking we have to "fix" things that cause discomfort. We are all seeking "ground under our feet", as Pema Chodron says, and that is one of the ways we stay stuck in samsara.
Me: I think that there are many different versions of Buddhism, and that's why I think that your opinion isn't necessarily true. What you're describing sounds more like a faith-based version, where you trust in an emotional state. Then you go on to say that we have to be comfortable with not understanding. While I agree that the ultimate nature of reality requires no understanding as such, a lot before that, in my opinion, requires understanding. Then at a certain point, you can kick away all the intellectual ladders when you've reached the summit. Of course you may choose to still operate in samsara for the benefit of others, which requires intellectual activity, but there's ideally no grasping at all.
shenpen: You should read Freedom From Extremes by Gorampa, translated by Jose Cabezon if you want to read a translation of a Tibetan text on emptiness.
Me: Thanks for the recommendation too. I'll look into it.
Richard: Believing you have an understanding (there is no "understanding" that isn't at base intellectual i.e. dualistic, relative, comparative-measure based, object of mind) of the "Ulimate nature of reality" is in a sense the ultimate snare.
Me: See my response to Foiblefull.
Me: It seems to me that realization of ultimate reality has to be in some sense positive; otherwise, what's the point of seeking it? I wasn't the one who said "The very practice...", but you're basically right: I've logged less than 300 hours of meditation time in all my life. I've been pretty diligent with day-to-day mindfulness, which I think helps a lot too. I think that the feeling of peace that I get in those moments when I'm thinking about emptiness and it all "makes sense" is already part of that experiential realization that you speak about. But I agree with you that I need to integrate more meditation practice. I've been starting to do some Guru Yoga, and I'm already enjoying it.
When I lived in Germany I once ran into a postgraduate thesis someone had written on understanding the humor of Woody Allen movies. (That was back when Woody Allen movies were funny.) Having grown up in New York among very Woody Allen-esque people, I remember thinking how futile (and kind of sad) it was to try to cogitate/analyze one's way into the experience of humor.
When I first started "searching" for ___________ I believed I could use my wondrous powers of ratiocination to get where I wanted to go. Now, after perhaps 30 years of trying (over and over and over and over (and over!!!)) I'm coming to the conclusion that this is a futile (and kind of sad) quest.
Emptiness is to be experienced.
Emptiness is to be experienced.
Me: It seems that you're advocating a faith-based approach here by saying that emptiness is to be experienced, and that any intellectual exploration is useless. If so, then I'll be clear that that kind of faith is not for me. Didn't the Buddha himself say that the purity of his ideas should be tested?
After five years of serious thought about this, my intuition is that the only thing that keeps me from having absolute certainty in the truth of emptiness from an intellectual perspective is my cultural conditioning (Western upbringing), and that this can be overcome with the proper guidance and effort. And I'm not alone in this perspective either; I've read plenty of Buddhist material which says that elimination of doubts regarding the view is paramount for realization and liberation. My biggest guiding light is probably Nagarjuna, and I don't think anyone can overestimate his influence on Mahayana tradition.
Just some thoughts from someone who went through alot of unnecessary struggle over the years.
I'm not advocating anything. I shared something that I feel is true. If it resonates, it resonates; if not, not. Each to his/her own path, yes? :-)
Every so often I'll feel I've HIT it: "gotten" emptiness. Then I'll (usually) remember that emptiness cannot be gotten.
you can contemplate how objects lack inherent existence while you do simple tasks, like the laundry. Contemplating impermanence throughout the day is also very good, and it leads into emptiness.
Me: As is obvious in my earlier posts, I'm into proof. My philosophical enquiries have provided a fairly firm foothold, in that they have offered me some degree of proof that emptiness is true (though of course emptiness itself is ultimately empty too). I would find it impossible to practice with the hope that someday I would realize emptiness without thinking at all about whether it existed or not. I need that inkling that it in fact is something "achievable", and that's what philosophical enquiry has given me. That's why your approach seems to be faith-based to me: it seems to state that we must not think about emptiness, but merely trust that if we practice enough, some day we'll reach liberation. I realize that liberation is ultimately a concept and therefore dualistic, but like I said before, if there's not something positive at the end, then why bother to attain it? And yes, I'm aware that it takes time to change our conditioned mindstream; in fact, I think that what I'm doing through my philosophical seeking is just that.
rachMiel: I'm not advocating anything. I shared something that I feel is true. If it resonates, it resonates; if not, not. Each to his/her own path, yes? :-)
Me: I think you shared it with the hope that it would help me, which is perfectly understandable and much appreciated.
rachMiel: Every so often I'll feel I've HIT it: "gotten" emptiness. Then I'll (usually) remember that emptiness cannot be gotten.
Me: But the peace and bliss that we ultimately are can be gotten, right?
pearl: Hi Otiose, you can contemplate how objects lack inherent existence while you do simple tasks, like the laundry. Contemplating impermanence throughout the day is also very good, and it leads into emptiness.
Me: Hi pearl, I guess my conflict is between preserving mindfulness of doing the laundry (a cognitive task) and contemplation of emptiness (another cognitive task). We clearly can't really do two things at once. So it seems that eventually, meditating on emptiness separately from everyday tasks would lead to a deep feeling of peace and bliss that could accompany the cognitive tasks of doing laundry. So we have one cognitive thing and one emotional thing, for lack of better words. Of course, every once in a while I could pause in the middle of doing the laundry and reflect on how I, the clothes, the sink, etc. are all empty. And yes, I agree that contemplating impermanence also helps.
Thailand: Would it be wrong to say that any human being understood the nature of reality awoken or not? I personally thought that however much you study reality with your 5 senses and mind you will never understand it truly as you are PERCEIVING it?
Me: I think that emptiness is the great master key the unlocks the nature of reality, however it presents itself. So I think it is possible to talk about understanding the ultimate nature of reality. However, I do agree that understanding on an intellectual level is ultimately limited. It seems to me that when all other concepts are absent, then there is just peace, just that perceiving, and that's what really exists.
What are you trying to be mindful of when you do the laundry?
Are you by chance using meditation methods from several types of Buddhism?
"So we have one cognitive thing and one emotional thing, for lack of better words."
The realisation of emptiness is something that reveals itself through practise over time. I strongly suggest you investigate the emptiness of your own thoughts, those of us that tend to think and intellectualise too much, like you and me, have perfect subjects (and objects) for emptiness in our own thoughts. The problem is, and this is where ego gets in the way, its not the content of our thoughts that are important but their nature themselves, and we are far more interested in the content of our thoughts than looking into the real nature. However, if you do tend to think a lot then this is a good point of investigation. There is a catch, however, we cannot accurately look into the nature of our own thoughts until we have stabilised them to some degree with tranquillity meditation. Until we do that we will not be able to look beyond the noise of the thoughts themselves.
We all have our own reasons for looking into buddhism, my guess is that one of your reasons is to discover the answers to the universe. It sounds very grandiose like that, but its no different to why many scientists chose to delve into science. My reason was the same. The joy of discovery, the last unknown in the modern world, the mind itself a place for explorers of the future. I kept trying to find the "real" answer and when I discovered buddhism I had finally found it (well more accurately the starting point), though I must say my motivation has changed somewhat since then.
There is a problem though, what we read is distorted. Even when I read your and others' posts, what I understand is twisted by my own karmic history (and vice versa). So that, when you have a conversation with someone, you never really have one conversation but two different parallel conversations, they can be slightly different or completely different. I constantly tell myself to keep this in mind. But as you've studied into philosophy you would probably already know that.
Anyway, you realise that concepts are limited and faulty.
"there is nothing that is ultimately real besides the "conceptless peace" "
You understand that impermanence is a useful concept nonetheless.
You have a 'basic understanding of the ultimate nature of reality on an intellectual level' (slightly modified out of cheekiness).
Merely putting those three together causes some problems. Concepts are by nature part of the relative world and as such are impermanent. So your intellectual understanding of ultimate reality is, by nature, transient. So your problem that you describe, ie trying to hold this intellectual understanding in your mind at all times, is actually a realisation into the impermanence of intellectual understanding.
As soon as you are happy with your conceptual/intellectual understanding of buddhism, then you have gone off course. We must feel slightly off kilter to continue progressing. However, if you have experienced the conceptless peace, then this is not a conceptual experience, its designation surely is, but the experience itself isn't. This state is more often than not brought on by confusion rather than understanding, though confusion in this case is realisation or wisdom. So the quickest way for an intelligent person to progress in Buddhism is to get well and truly confused.
So you should consider renouncing intellectual "understanding", but not intellectual "investigation".
Some books that might help in your understanding: "Mind at Ease" by Traleg Kyabgon- a great book on Mahamudra the ultimate nature of reality, "Buddhist Existentialism" by Robert Miller- based somewhat on this conceptless peace, probably not what you would think based on the title. B Alan Wallace has a good book "Choosing Reality, : A Buddhist View of Physics and the Mind".
"then I want to talk technique." meditation, contemplation, ethics.
PS: Try reading the dharma, make sure there is a fair amount of definitive rather than interpretive reading. If you're fortunate then you will experience the conceptless peace while reading and will discover that its not impossible to experience this simultaneously with conceptual thought. Irrespective of whether that happens or not read a lot and meditate a lot. Both tranquility and insight meditation. Don't underestimate tranquillity meditation.
PPS: Ethics produces the causes and conditions for successful practise.
Anyway this post is way too long, I doubt that anyone would bother reading any further so I'll call it quits while I'm behind.
Cheers, good luck and keep posting!
PPPS: I did warn you that I like to listen to my own thoughts
I don't agree with the use of the word either! In fact, I don't agree with the use of any words...or any thoughts...or any feelings...
I agree that they can "show you where to go", so to speak. But I disagree that they can actually "get you there".
Try looking down at your hand. Count the fingers. I hope you count five ... but it doesn't matter, because I count five on my hand, and that is what I know. There is no intellectualization here, and this experience is hardly faith-based.
Try this. I said that wrong ... try THINKING about this ... Slam a car door on your hand. Do you think the feeling of physical pain and the emotions it would engender would be "faith-based" or "experientially-based"?
The Buddha said that we are not to believe anything as true until we have experienced it. He didn't say, "until we have conceptualized it". Christians conceptualize and extend faith where there is no first-hand knowledge. Buddhists have to unlearn this, and realize that grabbing with thoughts is not the same thing as first-hand experience.
Me: I'm just mindful of doing the laundry, nothing more. I'm pretty sure that all the methods I use (mindfulness, analytical emptiness, and samatha) are from the Tibetan tradition.
rachMiel: OD you've got a ton of passion and energy, which is a really good thing. :-)
Me: Thanks a lot!
Whoknows: Welcome Otiose, its good to see your comments.
Me: Thanks!
Whoknows: The realisation of emptiness is something that reveals itself through practise over time. I strongly suggest you investigate the emptiness of your own thoughts, those of us that tend to think and intellectualise too much, like you and me, have perfect subjects (and objects) for emptiness in our own thoughts. The problem is, and this is where ego gets in the way, its not the content of our thoughts that are important but their nature themselves, and we are far more interested in the content of our thoughts than looking into the real nature. However, if you do tend to think a lot then this is a good point of investigation. There is a catch, however, we cannot accurately look into the nature of our own thoughts until we have stabilised them to some degree with tranquillity meditation. Until we do that we will not be able to look beyond the noise of the thoughts themselves.
Me: I think when I get right down to it, I've got pretty good powers of concentration, and that tends to cut right through to the nature of thoughts and emotions. I just get to that point in my analysis, that "ah ha!" moment, when all analysis comes to fruition, and then I rest in the joy (a joy which tells me that there's absolutely nothing to worry about) that results from that. I was reading Gen Lamrimpa's 'Realizing Emptiness', and he talks specifically about this type of practice.
I'm only to the point right now where I can maintain that joy for a very short time, but I think that over that time those moments will become longer and longer, and eventually (hopefully) permeate my entire consciousness.
Whoknows: We all have our own reasons for looking into buddhism, my guess is that one of your reasons is to discover the answers to the universe.
Me: To be honest, I'm only really interested in that answers that will make me happy and make those around me happy.
Whoknows: There is a problem though, what we read is distorted. Even when I read your and others' posts, what I understand is twisted by my own karmic history (and vice versa). So that, when you have a conversation with someone, you never really have one conversation but two different parallel conversations, they can be slightly different or completely different. I constantly tell myself to keep this in mind. But as you've studied into philosophy you would probably already know that.
Me: Yeah, I understand perfectly what you mean about what I call 'word slippage'.
Whoknows: You have a 'basic understanding of the ultimate nature of reality on an intellectual level' (slightly modified out of cheekiness).
Me:
Whoknows: Merely putting those three together causes some problems. Concepts are by nature part of the relative world and as such are impermanent. So your intellectual understanding of ultimate reality is, by nature, transient. So your problem that you describe, ie trying to hold this intellectual understanding in your mind at all times, is actually a realisation into the impermanence of intellectual understanding.
Me: But I'm trying to make it into an emotional understanding. And isn't the enlightenment state characterized by peace and joy?
Whoknows: As soon as you are happy with your conceptual/intellectual understanding of buddhism, then you have gone off course. We must feel slightly off kilter to continue progressing.
Me: I definitely feel off kilter, because of my recurring doubts about the truth of the insight. But I don't feel so unsure that I just abandon my search.
Whoknows: So the quickest way for an intelligent person to progress in Buddhism is to get well and truly confused.
Me: Could we say that my doubts are a form of confusion?
Whoknows: So you should consider renouncing intellectual "understanding", but not intellectual "investigation".
Me: I agree completely. I think I do it already, though.
Whoknows: Some books that might help in your understanding: "Mind at Ease" by Traleg Kyabgon- a great book on Mahamudra the ultimate nature of reality, "Buddhist Existentialism" by Robert Miller- based somewhat on this conceptless peace, probably not what you would think based on the title. B Alan Wallace has a good book "Choosing Reality, : A Buddhist View of Physics and the Mind".
Me: Thanks a lot!
Whoknows: PPPS: I did warn you that I like to listen to my own thoughts
Me: No problem at all!
seeker242: I don't agree with the use of the word either! In fact, I don't agree with the use of any words...or any thoughts...or any feelings...
Me: Not even the peace and joy of enlightenment?
FoibleFull: O.Dodge (great name! It sounds like an invocation!)
Me: Thanks!
FoibleFull: Try looking down at your hand. Count the fingers. I hope you count five ... but it doesn't matter, because I count five on my hand, and that is what I know. There is no intellectualization here, and this experience is hardly faith-based.
Me: But what I mean is that you need faith to do the practice which gets you to realization and liberation. It's time and effort which you could presumably spend doing something else, taking another path which claims to lead to real happiness.
FoibleFull: The Buddha said that we are not to believe anything as true until we have experienced it. He didn't say, "until we have conceptualized it".
Me: How about remembering first-hand experience of no-thingness and only realizing then what it was, and that serving as a conceptual marker which makes you have a mini-realization of the truth of the teachings? What I'm trying to communicate is that I think there is an emotional state associated with the ceasing of ignorance (realization), and that that's what I believe results (in small flashes) from my analysis. There was a Tibetan Buddhist teacher who said that meditation is really extending the time between the arising of thoughts.
FoibleFull: Christians conceptualize and extend faith where there is no first-hand knowledge. Buddhists have to unlearn this, and realize that grabbing with thoughts is not the same thing as first-hand experience.
Me: And don't you need faith in the power of practice as a tool to get you to realization, particularly if you don't know if the teachings are true and therefore justify this practice?
It seems that if we are seeking emptiness, than we wouldn’t be building up emptiness through understanding and holding concepts, thereby building a wall of knowledge, but rather coming upon ultimate clarity by emptying out what we think we already know. Not just dropping these present truths, out of hand, but rather through continuous investigation, and finally seeing through them. Clutter, or accumulation, certainly cannot be synonymous with emptiness.
However, this being said, the mind is certainly the perfect tool for doing exactly this…emptying out.
The mind cannot look directly at emptiness and understand exactly what it is looking at, simply because mind will immediately make emptiness into an object. The mind is capable of look at our thoughts, and seeing that they are ultimately not true or substantial. Thoughts, and what they represent, won’t stand up to this close scrutiny. In this way, misconceptions begin to fall away, melt, and eventually leaving us empty handed.
In other words, we are looking to see beyond what our thoughts would have us believe, and by use of the mind seeing how empty of meaning these mental constructs actually are.
What happens next is that we “Wake Up” from this dreaming mind. After all, isn’t every thought merely a temporary dream state, like individual clouds in the sky? The Sun of Waking will burn them off.
The reason that you cannot hold this Peace or Bliss constantly in your mind is that mind isn’t meant to hold anything permanently. Mind is a flowing river rushing ever on.
Pure Awareness actually holds mind, and her thoughts, if you will. Thoughts dash about like a movie playing across the screen of Pure Awareness. The screen (Pure Awareness) then, would be the only ‘Constant,’ even when the movie was turned completely off (death).
If the screen is “Constant,” what need to hold on to it? Where is it going?
Also please consider that Peace and Bliss may not end up being exactly what you think they are in your present mind set…something like pleasure or ecstasy of some kind. Both of these are the mind’s idea of fun at some point. Bliss may rather represent freedom from the push and pull of mind, or freedom from pleasure and pain.
Hope this helps some in you search.
Peace and love,
S9
My humble advice is don't get tied up with lots of speculative thoughts and concepts, meditate and be mindful of the here and now. It's the present moment that counts.
As for 'emptiness' have a look here ...........
http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=0a23260e4c9f19f87cf754615c673944&topic=3268.ms
Kind wishes to all.
Dazzle
.
I don't think it can be overstated how important it is to seek the company of mature people like that. It gives confidence while at the same time stripping away our own pretensions. Without this kind of encouragement it is easy to get swept under, or despair at the effort.
About Pure Awareness: I'm assuming that it's not empty -- is that right?
My other question is about the peace of realization, and may well be linked to the notion of Pure Awareness. This peace now seems like an inherently problematic notion to me, since peace is a concept, and conceptualizing is an obstacle to realization, when you're not using concepts as stepping stones to realization. But if we don't claim that peace will result from realization, since it's just another concept, then why seek realization?
Maybe I have an answer, and would love to get feedback. My answer is:
Emptiness is the true nature of reality. One result of realization is seeing things as they are, and truth is fundamentally better than not-truth. We're also liberated from suffering. I don't know if there are any further implications of this, but it seems to point to realization still having a positive valence, ie, being in line with truth and being liberated from suffering. Are there any further implications (such as peace), if I'm even on the right track?
Me: But isn't the nature of the ego empty?
Jeffrey: And if a tiger is in the room an appropriate response is to back away slowly while saying "nice tiger".. :P
Me: Sage advice!
So what I was cautioning you was to first examine the four noble truths. Which will reveal the nature of ego.
Otherwise you will suffer because you will view "realization" as something that you have to get. Like any samsaric experience.
OK, that helps a lot!
"According to the Buddhist tradition, the spiritual path is the process of cutting through our confusion, of uncovering the awakened state of mind. When the awakened state of mind is crowded in by ego and its attendant paranoia, it takes on the character of an underlying instinct. So it is not a matter of building up the awakened state of mind, but rather of burning out the confusions which obstruct it. IN the process of burning out these confusions we discover enlightenment. If the process were otherwise, the awakened state of mind would be a product dependent on cause and effect and therefore liable to dissolution. Anything which is created must, sooner or later, die. If enlightenment were created in such a way, there would always be the possibility of ego reasserting itself, causing a return to the confused state. Enlightenment is permanent because we have not produced it; we have merely discovered it. In the buddhist tradition the analogy of the sun appearing from behind the clouds is often used to explain the discovery of enlightenment. In meditation practice we clear away the confusion of ego in order to glimpse the awakened state. The absence of ignorance, of being crowded in, of paranoia, opens up a tremendous way of life. One discovers a different way of being."
I'd give instructions (on meditation) if I was approved by my teacher to teach, but I am not
"mindful of whatever comes up" sounds about right but the breath is used so we notice more easily when we are daydreaming.
I believe what Trungpa is saying is that any thing that comes will consequently go, aka temporary. This being true, if there is realization at/all, “Clarity”, it must be “here” right “now,” and egoic mind is looking right through it much like a sheet of glass. This sheet of glass is so clean that we disregard it. While actually once noticed is like an elephant in the room that most persons don’t notice…incredible yet true, mind being the wrong tool.
Mind is under the impression that realization is just one more thing, same old/same old, explainable in our usual terms. But I see realization rather as so very understated, aka subtle, that the mind simply overlooks it, or isn’t stimulated by it enough to honor it, much like a cat may overlook it prey when that prey isn’t moving.
I am going to think on your direct questions to me and write tomorrow when I have more time in order to do them justice.
Peace and love,
S9