Sensual Snapshots

[pseudonymous]

Indeed, but how is this possible if we regard our state of mind as having reached it's climax?

So long as one suffers, one is not enlightened. And yes, this is experiential. I am not enlightened and I'm still suffering, so there we go.

i would hope that my expression so far has clearly stated that i do not perceive enlightenment as being the climax. enlightenment for me is just the realization of Self within the witnessing of the passive principle - becoming present and able to experience Self as presence. from enlightenment there begins the long journey to Self awareness...prior it was unconscious awareness of Self. this is my definitions, based on my experiences, and are subject to change...but not de-evolving back to the limited perception of enlightenment (which i have evolved past).

stating what enlightenment is from a place of admitted not having experienced it seems like a creation of boundaries. there are many different definitions out there for the word "enlightenment" from various disciplines and philosophies...that would lead one to think that enlightenment was a personal experience, and should be defined experiencially...for conceptual truths are not experiencial truths.

dcv-

 

[samabudhi]

Necessary for survival, which is dependent on it's driving mechanism, suffering, which is exactly what Buddhists want, and everyone else should be trying, to transcend.

this is a conceptual statement - rote buddhism 101. it can equally be perceived that senses were necessary for the evolving consciousness to become aware of itself - no form, and no arena for perception of Self. what you term "suffering" i would see as the necessary steps from unconsciousness to conscious Self awareness.

And we are consciousness, so we're trying to break free from our form, which brings us suffering, just as our forms try to break free of their environment.

Nah, I don't buy that. Just have another look at your post. You could have at least used an emoticon, but after that post, it probably would just have sounded sarcastic.

whether you buy it or not is none of my concern - because you own your reactions.

Then why contrive to humour me? You're in a circle here. You want to make me happy, but you don't.

You can make all the claims you want, but it only puts you up for scrutiny. If I was counting, you would be in the negatives by now.

why does it put me up for scrutiny? why the need to be a sniper in waiting for anyone who claims enlightenment? why should anyone be concerned with your "count" as you have admitted you are not enlightened, and have only concepts of other people to measure my enlightenment. experience it your Self, then we can have a dialogue without you "scrutinizing" me.

I'm not the sniper, I'm the body guard telling my employer to stick his face in the mud for his own good. Why put yourself up just to be torn down? It serves no purpose.

A common misconception, that is, that we have to be bombastic and insensitive until anyone listens to us. In other words, we have to shove our bums in their faces.

your reaction is your property. what you see as "bombastic" and "insensitive" i see as being sure of my Self, through my experiences, and when someone tells me my experiences are false because they have read this book, or heard that teaching, i have a right to express my truths/perceptions. you find my appearance as abrasive because you are focused on the form, and not the substance.

Neither, I'm focused on the intention. Your own experiences are only intellectual entertainment for me. I'm interested in why you post what you post and how you do so (wording, choice of language, what to reply to, etc).

You say less than 1% of the human race is conscious of self, and you're part of that statistic. What do you consider special if not this?

i consider it a blessing, but in the context used, it was referring that i found myself better than others because of my awareness. this simply is not true. i cannot accept my awareness, while denying my neighbor their potentials too. again, your reaction is your property, and not a reflection of my intent/motives.

But don't you consider awareness a prime ingredient in the path to an enlightened mind? If you are not fully aware, in the Buddhist belief, you are not enlightened.

 

[samabudhi]

i would hope that my expression so far has clearly stated that i do not perceive enlightenment as being the climax. enlightenment for me is just the realization of Self within the witnessing of the passive principle - becoming present and able to experience Self as presence. from enlightenment there begins the long journey to Self awareness...prior it was unconscious awareness of Self. this is my definitions, based on my experiences, and are subject to change...but not de-evolving back to the limited perception of enlightenment (which i have evolved past).

stating what enlightenment is from a place of admitted not having experienced it seems like a creation of boundaries. there are many different definitions out there for the word "enlightenment" from various disciplines and philosophies...that would lead one to think that enlightenment was a personal experience, and should be defined experiencially...for conceptual truths are not experiencial truths.

dcv-

Well if we are to agree on anything, then it is advisable that you familiarise yourself with the general understanding of what enlightenment is.
Simply becoming aware of the self has not been the definition of enlightenment from any of the disciplines I've explored. Enlightenment is always seen as the end goal. Where did your understanding of enlightenment come from?

 

[pseudonymous]

we are consciousness, so we're trying to break free from our form, which brings us suffering, just as our forms try to break free of their environment.

we are not trying to break free of our form because we are consciousness. we are trying to break free because consciousness evolved into a form that has a pre-frontal lobe, which allowed consciousness to be aware of its unnecessary suffering.

Then why contrive to humour me? You're in a circle here. You want to make me happy, but you don't.

the only circle here is your inability to drop this sand kicking. as i started the thread, i am simply responding to your whims, until the need to have the last word has burned itself out in you.


I'm not the sniper, I'm the body guard telling my employer to stick his face in the mud for his own good. Why put yourself up just to be torn down? It serves no purpose.

i think you give yourself too much credit. if your intent is to tear me down, then perhaps it is your face that is in the mud.


I'm focused on the intention. Your own experiences are only intellectual entertainment for me. I'm interested in why you post what you post and how you do so (wording, choice of language, what to reply to, etc).

so far you have shown little interest in why i post what i post, but do seem to have a lot of interest in the form it takes. perhaps a statement like my experiences being your intellectual entertainment is the truth here, and not that you have any interest in my experiences whatsoever beyond that. i will not reduce your experiences to such a patronizing level. of course, i have yet to hear of your experiences...just what is wrong with mine.

But don't you consider awareness a prime ingredient in the path to an enlightened mind?

experience is the prime ingredient to expand awareness. awareness without experience is nil.

If you are not fully aware, in the Buddhist belief, you are not enlightened.

well i guess i should be thankful that i haven't adopted any boundaries to my experiencing. before you chop wood, and carry water...after you chop wood and carry water. (apparently i missed all the filler in the hidden paratheses)

dcv-

 

[pseudonymous]

Well if we are to agree on anything, then it is advisable that you familiarise yourself with the general understanding of what enlightenment is.

another way of saying when i come to agree with your concept of what enlightenment is, then you will agree with me? no thank you.


Simply becoming aware of the self has not been the definition of enlightenment from any of the disciplines I've explored. Enlightenment is always seen as the end goal. Where did your understanding of enlightenment come from?

before you chop wood and carry water, and after you chop wood and carry water...so the end goal is to chop wood and carry water. well i was enlightened many years ago. (that was humor, by the way...i do know the esoteric meaning behind the chop wood statement).

dcv-

 

[Ciel]

Pseudonymous, may I ask, have you ever met another who has made the same essential journey as you're self ? Essential, here evaluating to higher connective guidance, and all stages incorporated along the way. Even though the translation may differ, recognition brings total agreement.

 

[pseudonymous]

Pseudonymous, may I ask, have you ever met another who has made the same essential journey as you're self ? Essential, here evaluating to higher connective guidance, and all stages incorporated along the way. Even though the translation may differ, recognition brings total agreement.

ciel,

you will forgive me for not being sure what you are asking. i have not met any people online that are guided solely by source, but i would imagine they exist. i think that people miss my dancing with conceptual people as a personal sense of superiority complex. nothing could be further from the truth. i can honestly say that i have zero interest in what another person thinks. i do not get my perceptual information from interaction with others, and concepts do not equal awareness - which is my area of interest. i expect others to perceive differently than me, and i know that often we describe the same reality using different words. i have written about this in my column on a few occasions.

what interests me is how another person thinks. had the first respondent simply stated his beliefs, without the necesseity of saying others were incorrect, i would have said "thanks for sharing and adding to the dialogue". if a person has no experience of what he is defending, then his opinion is just an opinion - and should be noted as such. if someone tells me my experiencial perceptions are bunk, but can only prove it by repeating concepts of other people, then i tend to call them on that...not to put them in their place, but to help them see that concepts distract from Self awareness...and to say maybe not too clearly that conjecture does not prove anything.

everything that i write, ciel, is honest. if a person reads my collection of writings they will see someone who is doing the best they can under a unique path of awakening. i say it is unique because it is not adopted from other people's explorations. that is rare whether anyone wants to admit it or not. since my point of reference is not a much repeated man-made ontology, then i have to work a little harder to explain myself for those who challenge me with borrowed perceptions. and you can see what the results can often be reduced to.

you will notice the page views spiked very high once sand kicking started on this thread (so anyone reading reserve your judgment until you address this need to be entertained). but i suggest everyone notice that when i am addressed respectfully, i respond in same. when someone kicks sand or tells me my perceptions are false because they read a book once that my awareness does not jibe with, then i respond by addressing their lack of experience.

there was nothing new or original in the intentions behind the sand kicking. i have been witness to it many times, but never as the aggressor. i have nothing to defend with an awareness that was handed to me. my perceptions (or how i think) are my only property here.

dcv-

 

[samabudhi]

we are consciousness, so we're trying to break free from our form, which brings us suffering, just as our forms try to break free of their environment.

we are not trying to break free of our form because we are consciousness. we are trying to break free because consciousness evolved into a form that has a pre-frontal lobe, which allowed consciousness to be aware of its unnecessary suffering.

Ok. You're coming at it from the direction that consciousness evolved into form. I think form evolved into consciousness.

I'm not the sniper, I'm the body guard telling my employer to stick his face in the mud for his own good. Why put yourself up just to be torn down? It serves no purpose.

i think you give yourself too much credit.

only trying to understand and help.

I'm focused on the intention. Your own experiences are only intellectual entertainment for me. I'm interested in why you post what you post and how you do so (wording, choice of language, what to reply to, etc).

so far you have shown little interest in why i post what i post, but do seem to have a lot of interest in the form it takes. perhaps a statement like my experiences being your intellectual entertainment is the truth here, and not that you have any interest in my experiences whatsoever beyond that. i will not reduce your experiences to such a patronizing level. of course, i have yet to hear of your experiences...just what is wrong with mine.

There's nothing wrong with yours, but you have conceded in your thread on enlightenment that in order to have a productive conversation with someone, they need to have the same experience as you, and, unfortunately, I am not enlightened, so I am only able to look on in awe. So, since the content of your posts is out of my understanding, I simply endeavour to understand what the nature of an enlightened person is, so that I may actualise his greatness. They say a man who has mastered an art reveals it in every action, and if this is so, then your enlightenment should show through your posts.

Well if we are to agree on anything, then it is advisable that you familiarise yourself with the general understanding of what enlightenment is.

another way of saying when i come to agree with your concept of what enlightenment is, then you will agree with me? no thank you.

I'm saying if you want to make use of the word enlightenment effectively in a forum where you are trying to convey your thoughts to others, then it is prudent to come to some sort of agreement on terminology. We have to have some rules with speech otherwise noone will understand what we are saying.

Simply becoming aware of the self has not been the definition of enlightenment from any of the disciplines I've explored. Enlightenment is always seen as the end goal. Where did your understanding of enlightenment come from?

before you chop wood and carry water, and after you chop wood and carry water...so the end goal is to chop wood and carry water. well i was enlightened many years ago. (that was humor, by the way...i do know the esoteric meaning behind the chop wood statement).

?

 

[samabudhi]

but i suggest everyone notice that when i am addressed respectfully, i respond in same.

And when not?

when someone kicks sand or tells me my perceptions are false because they read a book once that my awareness does not jibe with, then i respond by addressing their lack of experience.

So if someone shows that they are learned, you suppose that they lack experience?

Books only hold the conclusions of others' awareness. Why should quoting a book be any different to quoting oneself?

Do you really think your admittingly reactionary style of rhetoric is condusive to constructive debate?

 

[Ciel]

Higher consciousness lives in empathy of understanding of all things.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namate all,


interesting thread... to be sure.

there are a few things that i'd like to mention.. to sort of clear the waters, as it were.

at least from the Buddhist perspective, the term is not enlightenment.. it's nonesensical. the term is properly rendered Awakened. however, as Buddhism was first being introduced to the west, this was during the post-enlightenment period. and to present Buddhism as a more "rational" religion the english speakers choose the term "enlightenment" to represent the term Awakened. which, in my view, has lead to all sorts of confusions.

now, of course, the experience of awakeneing is something that can happen to any being at any point, provided the right causes and conditions have been established.

from my schools point of view... if we are here (as humans), we are still attached and not Awakened. pardon me if i don't feel that Maitreya has arisen yet, as i'm sure you all will

in the Vajrayana tradition, at least, the point of the praxis isn't to have isolated awakened experiences, rather, it's to maintain that awakened state throughout our moment to moment existence.. whilst we are working, talking and sleeping. in point of fact, if you cannot maintain this level of consciousness whilst asleep, in our tradition, that indicates that the practiconer has not Awakened in the Annutara Samyak Sambodhi sense.

Buddhists have views of the level of awakening that a particular being may have.. and they range from being a Stream Enterer (one that is convinced of the Buddhadharma and will continue on the path until Final, Complete Awakening) to that very state of Final, Complete Awakening.

in the eastern and especially the Buddhist views, this state is characterized by three primary attainments. the ability to magically appear in mulitple places at once, the ability to read the thoughts of sentient beings and the ability to teach the Dharma (which, according to Buddha Shakyamuni, is the real miracle).

 

[Abogado del Diablo]

Indeed, but how is this possible if we regard our state of mind as having reached it's climax?

So long as one suffers, one is not enlightened. And yes, this is experiential. I am not enlightened and I'm still suffering, so there we go.

Myth brings comfort to the suffering. Gnosis brings freedom from suffering.

Abogado del Diablo

 

[Zenda71]

in the eastern and especially the Buddhist views, this state is characterized by three primary attainments. the ability to magically appear in mulitple places at once, the ability to read the thoughts of sentient beings and the ability to teach the Dharma (which, according to Buddha Shakyamuni, is the real miracle).

Reading minds. Now there is something that sounds absolutely horrific to me. More like a curse than a blessing.

Zenda

 

[pseudonymous]

Reading minds. Now there is something that sounds absolutely horrific to me. More like a curse than a blessing.

zenda, i know that was likely posted a bit tongue in cheek - although if not i can agree that it sounds scary. when i awoke i became much more aware of what other people were thinking. not specific word for word thoughts, but more of a general idea. i have explored this ability some, but for the most part have left it on the back burner in favor of other endeavors. i know in my experience my mind (or whatever the correct term would be) has a way of filtering out the mundane thoughts of others, and allowing me access to whatever is of interest to whatever i am doing - be it teaching, or just feeling a person out for any hidden agendas.

dcv-

 

[Zenda71]

Reading minds. Now there is something that sounds absolutely horrific to me. More like a curse than a blessing.

zenda, i know that was likely posted a bit tongue in cheek - although if not i can agree that it sounds scary. when i awoke i became much more aware of what other people were thinking. not specific word for word thoughts, but more of a general idea. i have explored this ability some, but for the most part have left it on the back burner in favor of other endeavors. i know in my experience my mind (or whatever the correct term would be) has a way of filtering out the mundane thoughts of others, and allowing me access to whatever is of interest to whatever i am doing - be it teaching, or just feeling a person out for any hidden agendas.

dcv-

Yes, dcv, I was being tongue in cheek but also a bit not. I would hope that this "power" would come with the ability to turn it on or off, otherwise, I can easily imagine being swept away in a sea of others' emotions and/or suffering. Clearly, a very advanced skill for a well-trained mind ... (perhaps one not as often joking as mine? )

With metta,
ZW

 

[pseudonymous]

zenda,

i can remember in the beginning going shopping and having a dozen mood changes. it was finding that invisible switch - seemed to be about focusing on an individual rather than being open to anyone that eventually helped me tune it out. i am renowned for not being able to remain serious for more than a few minutes at a time, so sense of humor doesn't seem to affect it much. everything is a punchline to me...

dcv-

 

[iBrian]

Just caught the last few posts - got this down as the "empathic experience". When you've played around for a while you consciously know exactly when people are looking at you, and what their intentions are.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, though, I have problems assigning a real use for it. I can see real survival benefits - but, ultimately, can it be used to solve wider problems? Perhaps it is too much an issue of expectation, and undervaluing it.

I make a specific issue of describing the experience and how to use it - how to tune in better - in my aspiring writing. Maybe I should post something up one day before I go to the publishers.

 

[Zenda71]

I remember reading once that human beings are remarkably adept at reading emotions and other information by observing the very subtle changes in another's face, body language, and speech. Probably other things as well. Perhaps "waking up" involves both tuning in to another and being aware of such subtle cues and "information", while at the same time not allowing yourself to be tossed in every emotional direction at once ... ???



With metta,
Zenda

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste all,


Zenda, actually, i was quite serious about it... not tongue in cheek at all. however... i wouldn't worry overly much about this aspect.. well.. at least until you are able to reach the 3rd and 4th Jhanas... after that... it probably wouldn't be much of a hinderance.

the ability to read other thoughts is no different than those that possess the Greek charm... and the ability to appear in multiple places is the same as the Persian spell... thus, the Buddha advised that these things are not to be considered as anything special since it was easy enough to dismiss them as effects of other traditions and practices.

the real miracle of the awakening process, from the Buddhist perspective, is the ability to correctly transmit the Buddhadharma.

 

[iBrian]

I certainly agree, Zenda, that body language is extremely powerful, under-rated, and probably works with the empathic process. However, the empathic process canoperate without visual cues. I guess it's almost like "music" - people emit their own "music" according to how they are feeling. When someone looks at you - whether seen or unseen - it is like they turn their speakers towards you so the them and direction of the "music" can become quite distinguishable. Aggression and attraction, general extremes of emotion, are very easy to pick up. You can easily test this walking down the street - "feel" for the music from different sources being turned towards you. And you know it's working, because if you suddenly turn to the direction you felt the "music" from, the person looking at you will quickly glance aside. Maybe even blush, too.