|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
 Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 07:38:06 AM
|
Hi Kirtanman,
Nice video... thanks for the link.
quote:
Here's a video that Nandhi posted earlier this year, of Siddhar Baba Nataraj, speaking on being Beyond Enlightenment.
I find both the content on the power/energy to be very powerful (and interestingly, a perspective similar to Abhinavagupta's, regarding devas being internal to consciousness, as I outlined in our discussion in the Swami Lakshmanjoo thread).
Yes, all the Devas I have ever met have been internal to consciousness. In fact, I have never seen anything that was not internal to consciousness. |
 |
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 08:34:01 AM
|
Hi TI,
quote:
Here are my comments:
1) Adya never addresses the important issues there, like using manifestation to heal others, or destroy enemies. For surely, those are 'practical value' items. He never says anything about whether manifestation can be done regardless of whether or not it is good or evil. He never addresses the issue of continuation of karma even through small manifestations. He does not teach to release your desires, instead he says it's ok to keep stoking your desires with small practical manifestations. Isn't this contrary to the Dharma and contrary to "seek ye first the kingdom of God, and all things will be added onto you. ".?
As I see it, Adya is really pointing to self-realization in that video. He is saying that it is not important if you manifest something, or just hand over some cash and buy it, but what is important is that you don't get hung up on the idea that getting what you want will make you happy. This is quite in line with the Buddha’s teaching and is in fact the essence of the Four Noble Truths. The Buddha didn't tell people not to act in the world, but only to act in the right way (right action, one of the 8 aspects of the Noble eight-fold path).
Yes, Adya doesn't talk about healing, or about destroying your enemies, but that is in line with his overall message which is to look beyond the idea of being someone who is acting in the world, and realize your true nature.
quote:
And it is certainly contrary to the Hawaiian monks who say:
http://www.himalayanacademy.com/res...s_ch-47.html
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When we become careless in our lower realms of the mind after having reached contemplation, we use that great God-power in a negative way and build great barriers within ourselves that hold us in the lower realms of the mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't hear Adya tell anyone to use power in a negative way. 
quote:
2) Who cares if you manifest or pay with cold hard cash? How do I know if Adya is capable of manifestation? I guess we'll never know because he just doesn't care. How do we know that that is just not a copout? He has skilfully evaded the issue.
If someone were to materialize an emerald out of thin air, it would serve as proof. Sometimes proof is needed to help distinguish charlatans from genuine spiritualists. Sometimes proof is what sets apart real gurus and saints from wanna-bes.
I think you are right, it's just not an issue for him. I think, for him, it is more important to point people towards self-realization than to demonstrate siddhis, or not demonstrate siddhis. In fact the demonstration of siddhis could be a distraction to the people that he is trying to help, so it could be counter-productive. Amma felt pressured into performing a siddhi once, and so she did so. She performed a materialization of piasum. After that she said she would never perform another siddhi as it could lead people in the wrong direction. Even so, she went against here word and healed a leaper, which I guess was because she had so much love and compassion that she couldn't restrain herself.
quote:
3)Adya says, when your consciousness comes into union with the life force of your life... I thought consciousness was the life force of your life.
Normally it is not, and that is the whole purpose of yoga.
In Yoga, consciousness is described as Siva, and the life force is Shakti. The life force (shakti) emanates from Siva. In the human body Shakti is said to reside at the base of the spine as kundalini Shakti. Siva resides at the crown chakra as pure bliss consciousness. Through the process of Yoga, Shakti rises through the body to become united with Siva at the crown (and everywhere), and the union of the two is outpouring divine love. So consciousness comes into union with the life force, and that union is divine realization.
quote:
Perhaps he is describing consciousness realizing the soul, which is not enlightenment according to the monks. (From the same page):
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other perfection inherent in the soul of man is Satchidananda -- Being, Consciousness and Bliss. When mind force, thought force and the vrittis, or waves of the mind, are quiescent, the outer mind subsides and the mind of the soul shines forth. We share the mind of God Siva at this superconscious depth of our being. In entering this quiescence, one first encounters a clear white light within the body, but only after sufficient mastery of the mind has been attained through the disciplined and protracted practices of yoga.
...
Though it is supreme consciousness, Satchidananda is not the ultimate realization, which lies beyond consciousness or mind. This differs from popular interpretations of present-day Vedanta, which makes these two perfections virtually synonymous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the Himalayan monks (cool name by the way  ) are describing stages of realization in samadhi there. In very high states of samvikalpa samadhi, the realms of infinite light are encountered which are realms of bliss. Beyond these realms the consciousness enters nirvikalpa samadhi, which is the absolute, beyond even bliss and love, and from which the infinite realms of divine light radiate. Love and bliss come into being with the divine manifestation at this level, and these two levels are almost synonymous as far as the purity of the divine being is concerned. The divine manifestation at this level is satchitananda, and the absolute is beyond that.
But enlightenment, isn't a state (any state) of samadhi. It is a realization beyond even nirvikalpa samadhi, which goes right to the subtlest levels of the core of our being.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is about waking up, it's about Oneness, it's about realizing the unity of existence in ourself and each other, and then the rest, is you know, you're a free being, you follow your own karmic way with all the rest, with the way you move through life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does he mean that an enlightened person still has karma? How can that be? Arahants' actions do not incur any karma. Does he mean you can realize Oneness and still have karma? That certainly looks like what he has said. For, isn't karma what holds you back, prevents you from realizing, keeps the veils firmly held in place? Doesn't kundalini help burn karma? Isn't the Dharma about buring karma through proper living and practices?
As I saw it, in that sentence Adya was saying that the sadhana (that he is teaching) is about the realization of Oneness, and that, with that in mind as the goal of the sadhana, we must move through our life with freedom and in accordance with our karma. I can see how it could be interpreted to mean that once someone has realized oneness they are still under the influence of their karmic formations, but that wouldn't fit with everything else that Adya says about the true nature of freedom.
Christi
|
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 09:50:20 AM
|
The only way to monitor karma is to have the divya caksus.
So if you don't have the divya caksus, forget about talking about karma. |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 10:04:38 AM
|
Hi alwayson,
You may find that karma doesn't have much, if anything to do with the divya caksus. Karma is the process of cause and effect in action which can be observed in the mind by anyone. With the rise of the witness through meditation it becomes easier to see the process of karma and understand how it works.
As we sow, so shall we reap.
Christi
|
Edited by - Christi on Dec 04 2009 10:32:03 AM |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 11:17:17 AM
|
We are already that. Get out of the way.
Adamant |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 2:21:46 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Kirtanman,
quote:
Christi:
While I agree in part with some of your comments (vis a vis relational vs. non-relational inquiry), I don't feel that Adyashanti's teachings are unclear; in fact, Yogani recommends The End Of Your World by Adyashanti,
here.
However, I do know and agree that readiness affects understanding ... yet in this case, it seems that TI's detailed response emanated primarily from feeling that "oneness" is not a useful term for confict-free experience ... and that's fine, if he feels that way.
As I understand it, that's what non-relational self-inquiry is. When the mind tries to understand the words that are being used in the inquiry, and then it is too confusing because it can't be understood on the level of the mind, and then there is a whole process of spin-off ideas which ultimately result in the idea that the teacher must be a waste of time, and just saying anything that dribbles into his mouth... etc?
No? 
What would non-relational self-inquiry be if it wasn't that?
Christi
Hi Christi,
Good points ... thanks; I agree -- and thanks for the clarification.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 2:35:03 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Hi Kirtanman,
Nice video... thanks for the link.
quote:
Here's a video that Nandhi posted earlier this year, of Siddhar Baba Nataraj, speaking on being Beyond Enlightenment.
I find both the content on the power/energy to be very powerful (and interestingly, a perspective similar to Abhinavagupta's, regarding devas being internal to consciousness, as I outlined in our discussion in the Swami Lakshmanjoo thread).
Yes, all the Devas I have ever met have been internal to consciousness. In fact, I have never seen anything that was not internal to consciousness.
Hi Christi,
Me either ...... though I'm pretty sure I may have dreamed that I did!
"But seriously" ..... good; good .... we're most certainly on the same page here, so to speak, per your simple statements above .... and I must have *really* misunderstood you in the other thread ... because what you're saying above, is the very point I was making ... or at least intending to make ....in support of Abhinavagupta and Swami Lakshmanjoo originally making that point.
Apologies if I misunderstood you, and/or if I conveyed my points, or theirs, unclearly ..... because that's all I was saying, too:
It literally all occurs within consciousness; there is nothing outside consciousness.
Which is what ALL non-dual teachings, that ego mind can perceive in so many different ways, are ultimately saying:
Oneness Is Reality.
Awareness Experiencing Awareness.
Anything more than this involves attachment to conceptual dividing lines.
Concepts aren't actual.
Neither are dividing lines.
And thanks again, Christi -- the clarification re: relational and non-relational inquiry, and this clarification ..... are both very helpful; much appreciated.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman
|
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 2:39:33 PM
|
what is non-relational self-inquiry?
Almost nooone does self-inquiry right. I only got it after I got it. It only works in hindsight.
I would say not to waste time with self-inquiry. It does work, but only in hindsight. |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Dec 04 2009 2:53:02 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 3:29:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by chinna
This is true of all teachers, in the final analysis. It's not about the meaning of the words. The meaning of all words is the problem.
See this and the urge to evaluate teachers vanishes. We know when we have met our own teacher. We cannot know about anyone else's choice, any more than we can know why two people fall in love, or how that really works for them.
chinna
Hi Chinna,
Thanks for this; very true.
Words are indicators, and like anything else, the depth with which the words are experienced is limited only by the readiness/willingness of the hearer (/reader).
"He who has ears to hear, let him hear."
One of my favorite Adyashanti quotes is:
"One of these days, you're going to figure out: 'Adya, I need you like I need a hole in the head!!'"
True that; and for that, I thank him; big time!
My gratitude for Adyashanti goes far beyond the ability of words to express, very literally ... yet/and .... I have no need for him, either.
The same is true of Yogani; of Ramana, of Nisargadatta .... of all those, including all of you .... who have contributed to helping me realize -- I am ever already home.
_/\_
For me, Adyashanti's teachings were part of that which has ultimate value:
Realizing that there's no need for teachings ... or teacher.
... which is applicable once we realize this, of course ... ... prior to realization, teachings can, and do, serve as an awesomely useful map {AUM}.
As in: no one awakens in a vacuum; all realization is due to aspects of consciousness who have "gone before", and provided the teachings .... whether in words, via energy, or as silent infinite Self.
And so, paradoxically: while the entire purpose of teachers and teachings is to show they are not needed .... prior to realizing this, they are essential.
The sole purpose of a guru is to show the disciple that guru and disciple are the same ... are One ... are the Self .... that, therefore, they (the guru or teacher) are not needed.
Ultimately, all teachings are solely a map to actuality, while such a map is needed.
Words and meaning can be useful tools for communication; they make terrible deities, though.
Literally.
Even "enlightenment" is nothing more than simple reorientation to the actual, via release of concepts .... of the misunderstanding that concepts are connected with actuality.
Once this reorientation has occurred, this concept called enlightenment is released, as well.
There is actually only Self; anything "else" is artificial, conceptual division.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 3:53:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
But enlightenment, isn't a state (any state) of samadhi. It is a realization beyond even nirvikalpa samadhi, which goes right to the subtlest levels of the core of our being.
Hi Christi,
Great post!
Thanks very much!
And (to all, here, in case the following info might be useful) .......
The many (all the divisions of ego consciousness) dissolve into the one (savikalpa samadhi, when the conceptual division of subject-object-perception dissolves).
Then, the one becomes none ..... form dissolves into the emptiness from which it arises and is made of (nirvikalpa samadhi -- "beyond thought constructs" .... beyond all form, all concepts, all mind).
At this point, there can still be a very, very subtle sense of distinction .... there's the feeling of "I am what is happening right now" .... but there's still a sense that "I am" this emptiness .... this awareness .... yet, somehow, there's still some kind of distinction from the "stuff in the awareness" ......... even though it's known/experienced that "all this is my manifestation; manifestation of this that I am".
A slightly different way of saying it (at that level of experiencing) ....
"I am the unborn; the transcendent; the unmanifest" .... manifesting.
There is nothing that is not Self ... yet there is still the subtlest distinction between Self and that which Self is manifesting/doing ... still Shiva *and* Shakti .... the sun *and* its shine; completely awareness .... yet not always completely form/action.
Ultimately, though ...... even this dissolves .....
And just as the many become one ...
And the one becomes none ...
The none becomes ...
All.
Actually.
There is no separation; there is only self.
There is only being "all out" (or "all in" --- same non-difference ... ).
Adyashanti said this, once, long back ("I'm all out.") .... and I didn't have a *clue* as to what he meant!
And now, hey ... I'm all out (aka all in).
In ego-dream, prior to spirituality/yoga/whatever .... we "are who we think we are" .... dream of individual body/mind are essentially one thing, it seems (to ego-mind, in the dream).
Then "yoga stuff happens" (see above ... and below ... and now see here .... ) ... and there's all this transcendent woo-hoo-ness for a while, it seems.
Then ... there's dropping all the way in ...... no separation, of any kind on any level ...... not because there's metaphysical/supernatural enlightenment ........ but because all separation is a concept.
Diversity and distinction (which are obvious) are not the fullness of actuality ... which is the one self.
Any/all mental evaluation of this is ........ not it.
It must be experienced.
Self is only experiencing now.
Wholeheartedly,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 5:16:46 PM
|
There are two types of enlightenment
One is realizing the nature of the mind
The other is a mystical enlightenment |
|
|
|
Etherfish
USA
3615 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 8:46:05 PM
|
Well that's two according to people who philosophize. But how could anybody possibly compare different types of enlightenment unless they have experienced both?
I bet there are actually a lot of different kinds. Look how different the paths are for people on this forum. |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 10:12:21 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
TI, I don't disagree with you. I think Adyashanti appeals to so many people because of the quality of his energy. The words don't really matter. He could talk about parking spaces. He is manifesting a huge following and that's a siddhi. Look into the nature of your jealously and recognize the all-accomplishing wisdom.
Adamant
Hi Adamant,
There is no jealousy there. There is just concern that perhaps many seekers are being mislead into believing they are enlightened when in fact they are not. Also, I personally have no use for his teachings, meditations and writings.
I think Adya appeals to many people because of his back-street language, lack of Dharma or strict teachings/requirements and his maverick attitudes.
And again, as I have previously stated, I spent quite a long time studying Eckhart Tolle before I started studying Adya, and I can see that Adya has taken many words (and book titles) from Tolle's earlier writings. It's big business, I guess..
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 10:51:40 PM
|
Hi Chinna, :)
Thank you for your words of wisdom. (even though they are just words.. and the context is my whole life). :)
quote:
The inconsistencies of the teacher are defined by the disciple. Nisargadatta said one thing one moment, and the opposite the next, depending on the needs of the disciple.
Yes, I realize this as I have read "I AM That" twice. I love Nisargadatta, even with all the inconsistencies. Nisargadatta said the strangest things, and one must take them in context; he often changed his words based on who he was saying them to (as you have mentioned). Take this one, for example:
"First know your own mind and you will find that the question of other minds does not arise at all, for there are no other people."
To me, this is supporting a unified consciousness idea. Once you get into the realm of spirit/soul, it is all one.
Here is another teaching from Nisargadatta, which is not his usual "Focus on the feeling of "I AM"". :
"Q: What is meditation and what are its uses?
M: As long as you are a beginner certain formalised meditations, or prayers may be good for you. But for a seeker for reality there is only one meditation -- the rigorous refusal to harbour thoughts. To be free from thoughts is itself meditation.
Q: How is it done?
M: You begin by letting thoughts flow and watching them. The very observation slows down the mind till it stops altogether. Once the mind is quiet, keep it quiet. Don't get bored with peace, be in it, go deeper into it."
Here is another part of that same book denoting contradiction in what he says and what he does (Nisargadatta prays himself!).:
(M is Nisargadatta, Q is the questioner)
"Q: If worship and prayers are ineffectual why do you worship daily, with songs and music, the image of your Guru!
M: Those who want it, do it. I see no purpose in interfering.
Q: But you take part in it.
M: Yes, it appears so. But why be so concerned with me? Give all your attention to the question: 'What is it that makes me conscious?', until your mind becomes the question itself and cannot think of anything else."
But mostly, I like this one:
"Q: I feel the Yogi did not mean mere steadiness of purpose, resulting in ceaseless pursuit and application. He meant that with will fixed on the goal no pursuit or application are needed. The mere fact of willing attracts its object.
M: Whatever name you give it: will, or steady purpose, or onepointedness of the mind, you come back to earnestness, sincerity, honesty. When you are in dead earnest, you bend every incident, every second of your life to your purpose. You do not waste time and energy on other things. You are totally dedicated, call it will, or love, or plain honesty. We are complex beings, at war within and without. We contradict ourselves all the time, undoing today the work of yesterday. No wonder we are stuck. A little of integrity would make a lot of difference."
quote:
Zen does the same, until you get it and realise that the grand and solemn teacher is talking nonsense. For many, there is no great and personal revelation from the teacher. They just get to the point of asking 'why am I sitting in front of this person listening to all this'. At that point, the teaching may have completed its work.
Is it that the Zen teacher is talking nonsense, or talking in riddles/puzzles specifically designed to cause the mind to circle into an endless loop resulting in mental exhaustion to the point where the mind stops? I heard a favorite Zen practice is to hit the student when s/he is least expecting it, which automatically stops the mind. Zen has great wisdom, designed to stop the mind. Once the student realizes, isn't that when the work is done?
:)
TI
|
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 11:19:21 PM
|
Hi Christi :)
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Amma felt pressured into performing a siddhi once, and so she did so. She performed a materialization of piasum. After that she said she would never perform another siddhi as it could lead people in the wrong direction. Even so, she went against here word and healed a leaper, which I guess was because she had so much love and compassion that she couldn't restrain herself.
I saw Amma's video on Youtube where she manifested white liquid in a bowl, must be the same Amma you are talking about. I read that she also sucked the sores of a Leper every day with her mouth until the Leper was healed. Everyone around her thought it was the most disgusting thing they ever saw and begged her to stop..
...
quote:
Karma is the process of cause and effect in action which can be observed in the mind by anyone. With the rise of the witness through meditation it becomes easier to see the process of karma and understand how it works.
As we sow, so shall we reap.
Christi
Yes, the conventional usage of the term karma is what you've mentioned, but there is also another kind of karma that was pointed out by Mark Griffin. He says that as each thought is created the "I Thought" is created first and then we create the universe based on the "I Thought". This process occurs many millions of times per second. Each thought, as it is created, is created with our karma already built in.
I believe Patanjali also said that thoughts are colored by our latent impressions with are stored deep in the subconscious mind. Interesting concept, isn't it?
:)
TI |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Dec 04 2009 : 11:38:02 PM
|
Hi Kirtanman :)
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
"He who has ears to hear, let him hear."
Here are two quotes from the Gospel of Thomas, from "The Secret Teachings of Jesus", that your words made me look up:
"He said, "A person is like a wise fisher who cast a net into the sea, and drew it up from the sea full of little fish. Among them the wise fisher discovered a fine big fish. So the fisher threw all the little fish back into the sea, and with no hesitation kept the big fish. Whoever has ears to hear ought to listen"
...
"Jesus said, "There was a rich farmer who had a great deal of money. The farmer said, 'I shall invest my money so that I may sow, reap, pland and fill my storehouses with produce. Then I shall have everything.' These were the plans, but that very night the farmer died. Whoever has ears ought to listen".
Are any of these quotes the preceeding context from which your statement was derived?
quote:
One of my favorite Adyashanti quotes is:
"One of these days, you're going to figure out: 'Adya, I need you like I need a hole in the head!!'"
True that; and for that, I thank him; big time!
That is my favorite Adyashanti quote too! :)
:)
TI |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 04:00:38 AM
|
Thanks TI for all the Nisargadatta reminders.
I agree with you about Zen too. The teaching is purposeful nonsense, for sure.
chinna |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 08:10:43 AM
|
Hi TI,
quote:
I saw Amma's video on Youtube where she manifested white liquid in a bowl, must be the same Amma you are talking about. I read that she also sucked the sores of a Leper every day with her mouth until the Leper was healed. Everyone around her thought it was the most disgusting thing they ever saw and begged her to stop..
Almost the same Amma. I believe that when Amma performed the manifestation, nobody was around with a video camera. It was a while ago in a remote village in India. The youtube video is a re-enactment with an actor playing Amma.
quote:
Yes, the conventional usage of the term karma is what you've mentioned, but there is also another kind of karma that was pointed out by Mark Griffin. He says that as each thought is created the "I Thought" is created first and then we create the universe based on the "I Thought". This process occurs many millions of times per second. Each thought, as it is created, is created with our karma already built in.
I believe Patanjali also said that thoughts are colored by our latent impressions with are stored deep in the subconscious mind. Interesting concept, isn't it?
As I see it, it is not two kinds of karma, but one. When we see an object, the light from the object enters our eye. Then, there is mental recognition of the object (this is a tree, a rock etc.). Then a subtle process of relation happens, which is a colouring of the object according to our latent impressions. This process is simple but subtle and comes in the form: "I like, or I don't like, (this object)". It is a subtle layering of the "I" concept onto manifestation. I believe this is the "I thought" that Mark Griffin is referring to, and these "colourings of the thought self" are the "latent impressions" that Patanjali refers to. The same process of course happens with things seen, heard, touched, tasted, smelled or perceived purely with the mind. So we rarely experience reality as it is, pure, unfettered, innocent, pristine (divine).
This process of "colouring" reality with the latent impressions of the "I thought" then creates more latent impressions, which continues the whole karmic process of cause and effect and keeps us trapped in samsara (the cycle of birth and death) and suffering. So the term "action" in the karmic sequence does not have to be an action such as helping an old lady accross the road. It can happen on a very subtle level of the mind.
As I mentioned above, with the rise of the witness through meditation, it becomes easier to see how this process works in action. The most subtle levels of the manifestation of karma can only be seen and eradicated in the highest states of samadhi.
Christi |
Edited by - Christi on Dec 05 2009 08:28:14 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 12:04:46 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kirtanman
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
Yes, all the Devas I have ever met have been internal to consciousness. In fact, I have never seen anything that was not internal to consciousness.
Hi Christi,
Me either ...... though I'm pretty sure I may have dreamed that I did!
"But seriously" ..... good; good .... we're most certainly on the same page here, so to speak, per your simple statements above .... and I must have *really* misunderstood you in the other thread ... because what you're saying above, is the very point I was making ... or at least intending to make ....in support of Abhinavagupta and Swami Lakshmanjoo originally making that point.
Apologies if I misunderstood you, and/or if I conveyed my points, or theirs, unclearly ..... because that's all I was saying, too:
It literally all occurs within consciousness; there is nothing outside consciousness.
Hi Kirtanman,
Absolutely!
There is even a description in the Gita where Krishna gives Arjuna a vision of the true nature of the Self and shows him how reality looks from the perspective of cosmic consciousness. In it, Arjuna describes seeing all the Devas appearing inside the cosmic mind. I don't mind quoting it here as it is relevant to the discussion we have been having about unity (universal) consciousness and cosmic (Christ) consciousness in relation to enlightenment:
quote:
"Arjuna said: My illusion is dispelled by Your profound words, that You spoke out of compassion towards me, about the supreme secret of the Self.
O Krishna, I have heard from You in detail about the origin and dissolution of beings, and Your imperishable glory.
O Lord, You are as You have said, yet I wish to see Your divine cosmic form, O Supreme Being.
O Lord, if You think it is possible for me to see this, then O Lord of the yogis, show me Your imperishable Self.
The Supreme Lord said: O Arjuna, behold My hundreds and thousands of multifarious divine forms of different colors and shapes.
See the Adityas, the Vasus, the Rudras, the Ashvins, and the Maruts. Behold, O Arjuna, many wonders never seen before.
O Arjuna, now behold the entire creation; animate, inanimate, and whatever else you like to see; all at one place in My body.
But, you are not able to see Me with your physical eye; therefore, I give you the divine eye to see My majestic power and glory.
Sanjaya said: O King, having said this; Lord Krishna, the great Lord of (the mystic power of) yoga, revealed His supreme majestic form to Arjuna.
(Arjuna saw the Universal Form of the Lord) with many mouths and eyes, and many visions of marvel, with numerous divine ornaments, and holding divine weapons.
Wearing divine garlands and apparel, anointed with celestial perfumes and ointments, full of all wonders, the limitless God with faces on all sides.
If the splendor of thousands of suns were to blaze forth all at once in the sky, even that would not resemble the splendor of that exalted being.
Arjuna saw the entire universe, divided in many ways, but standing as (all in) One (and One in all) in the body of Krishna, the God of gods.
Then Arjuna, filled with wonder and his hairs standing on end, bowed his head to the Lord and prayed with folded hands.
Arjuna said: O Lord, I see in Your body all the gods and multitude of beings, all sages, celestial serpents, Lord Shiva as well as Lord Brahmaa seated on the lotus.
O Lord of the universe, I see You everywhere with infinite form, with many arms, stomachs, faces, and eyes. Neither do I see the beginning nor the middle nor the end of Your Universal Form.
I see You with Your crown, club, discus; and a mass of radiance, difficult to behold, shining all around with immeasurable brilliance of the sun and the blazing fire.
I believe You are the imperishable, the Supreme to be realized. You are the ultimate resort of the universe. You are the protector of eternal Dharma, and the imperishable primal spirit.
I see You with infinite power, without beginning, middle, or end; with many arms, with the sun and the moon as Your eyes, with Your mouth as a blazing fire whose radiance is scorching all the universe.
The entire space between heaven and earth is pervaded by You alone in all directions. Seeing Your marvelous and terrible form, the three worlds are trembling with fear, O Lord.
These hosts of demigods enter into You. Some with folded hands sing Your names and glories in fear. A multitude of Maharishis and Siddhas hail and adore You with abundant praises.
Rudras, Adityas, Vasus, Saadhyas, Vishwedevas, Ashvins, Maruts, Ushmapas, Gandharvas, Yakshas, Asuras, and Siddhas; they all amazingly gaze at You.
Seeing your infinite form with many mouths, eyes, arms, thighs, feet, stomachs, and many fearful teeth; the worlds are trembling with fear and so do I, O mighty Lord.
Seeing Your great effulgent and various-colored form touching the sky; Your mouth wide open and large shining eyes; I am frightened and find neither peace nor courage, O Krishna.
Seeing Your mouths, with fearful teeth, glowing like fires of cosmic dissolution, I lose my sense of direction and find no comfort. Have mercy on me! O Lord of gods, refuge of the universe. [Bagavad Gita Chapter 11]
http://www.thenazareneway.com/gita_chapter_11.htm
Christi |
Edited by - Christi on Dec 05 2009 12:18:54 PM |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 2:18:44 PM
|
quote:
One of my favorite Adyashanti quotes is:
"One of these days, you're going to figure out: 'Adya, I need you like I need a hole in the head!!'"
LOL. Exactly. |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Dec 05 2009 2:28:21 PM |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 2:40:28 PM
|
Christi, Question. Is Christ, Krishna or Cosmic Consciousness permanent or impermanent?
Adamant |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 3:17:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Christi, Question. Is Christ, Krishna or Cosmic Consciousness permanent or impermanent?
Adamant
In my experience it is neither permanent nor non-permanent because it is outside of time. Time is something which appears to exist at a certain level within cosmic consciousness. Beyond time it doesn't mean anything to say that something is permanent or not because these are relative terms.
Christi |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 3:24:38 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Christi, Question. Is Christ, Krishna or Cosmic Consciousness permanent or impermanent?
Adamant
In my experience it is neither permanent nor non-permanent because it is outside of time. Time is something which appears to exist at a certain level within cosmic consciousness. Beyond time it doesn't mean anything to say that something is permanent or not because these are relative terms.
Christi
Then would these terms also represent that which is neither real nor unreal? Cosmic consciousness is not a relative term?
Adamant |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 3:48:19 PM
|
Please just
a)find the clarity and vividness of the NOW.
b)Give it a name like Christ/Self/Adyashanti.
c)Then distinguish this from the thought stream, which can only be in a nonconceptual way
The thoughtstream contains the thoughts "I", "mine", "my" which is the ego. It also contains the fictious thoughtforms we call "people". This is the real meaning of Jesus's forgiveness. The thoughtstream also differentiates between diamonds and dirt. Didn't Jesus say something like he doesn't distinguish between dirt and gold? Can anyone give the passage number in the Bible? |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Dec 05 2009 4:09:52 PM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4364 Posts |
Posted - Dec 05 2009 : 4:39:06 PM
|
Hi Adamant,
quote:
Then would these terms also represent that which is neither real nor unreal?
Yes that's right, beyond both. All terms are relative, but they can point to that which is beyond the relative.
The Buddha once said that his teachings were like dreams, but they were special dreams, because they were dreams which had the power to awaken the dreamer.
Christi |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Wayne Wirs: Newly-Minted Enlightened Guy
Topic Locked
