|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
 Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 4:51:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
I think there's some confusion going on here about lights and bliss. To be clear: there are visible lights with colors, and also sensations of pleasure that arise from samadhi. These are mundane lights and bliss that arise from harmonization of prana in the channels and chakras.
Then there are what are just named lights and named bliss, but are not visible lights or sensation of bliss. These are transcendental and are beyond ordinary experience that we can communicate. They are associated with knowledge.
There is the light of self-awareness, known as clear light. There is the light of sensation, which is not sensation itself, but the readiness to experience. There is the light of distinction, that discriminates dualities and sameness. There is the light that is unimpeded capacity to manifest. There is the light of the vast expanse of space and possibilities. Lastly there is the light of time that perceives time and timelessness.
These are called lights, but they are not lights. They are knowledges. Light is a metaphor for what is the opposite to unknown. These knowledges are the same as the so-called Absolute. Knowledge of the Absolute is also called bliss, because it is finally being free of the burden of ignorance. It is the kind of bliss one would feel if one thought one were going to prison for life, but suddenly received a clemency and were set free. Or having an enormous debt and having some benefactor pay it off. This bliss is not associated with prana, but with knowledge.
Adamant
Hi Adamant
Prana and knowledge are surely inseparable, unless knowledge is being used metaphorically here too, which it may be from what you say about it? In which case I would agree with you, just using different words. The Absolute is beyond knowledge, it can't be the object of knowledge. Hence Klein's word 'apperception'. The word faith might be better than knowledge? A contentless confidence, based in nothing identifiable at all. All conceptual or experiential supports gone, no longer needed.
chinna |
 |
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 4:53:12 PM
|
True Knowledge comes from within and needs no validation.
Love.
 |
Edited by - CarsonZi on Jan 05 2010 4:53:35 PM |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 5:00:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by CarsonZi
True Knowledge comes from within and needs no validation.
Love.
Within what? Within or without? From exactly where? Can you identify its origin, really. Or is this just a conventional formula?
'Within' too is metaphorical.
chinna |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 5:02:39 PM
|
From the Silence.
Love.
|
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 5:29:51 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by chinna
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
I think there's some confusion going on here about lights and bliss. To be clear: there are visible lights with colors, and also sensations of pleasure that arise from samadhi. These are mundane lights and bliss that arise from harmonization of prana in the channels and chakras.
Then there are what are just named lights and named bliss, but are not visible lights or sensation of bliss. These are transcendental and are beyond ordinary experience that we can communicate. They are associated with knowledge.
There is the light of self-awareness, known as clear light. There is the light of sensation, which is not sensation itself, but the readiness to experience. There is the light of distinction, that discriminates dualities and sameness. There is the light that is unimpeded capacity to manifest. There is the light of the vast expanse of space and possibilities. Lastly there is the light of time that perceives time and timelessness.
These are called lights, but they are not lights. They are knowledges. Light is a metaphor for what is the opposite to unknown. These knowledges are the same as the so-called Absolute. Knowledge of the Absolute is also called bliss, because it is finally being free of the burden of ignorance. It is the kind of bliss one would feel if one thought one were going to prison for life, but suddenly received a clemency and were set free. Or having an enormous debt and having some benefactor pay it off. This bliss is not associated with prana, but with knowledge.
Adamant
Hi Adamant
Prana and knowledge are surely inseparable, unless knowledge is being used metaphorically here too, which it may be from what you say about it? In which case I would agree with you, just using different words. The Absolute is beyond knowledge, it can't be the object of knowledge. Hence Klein's word 'apperception'. The word faith might be better than knowledge? A contentless confidence, based in nothing identifiable at all. All conceptual or experiential supports gone, no longer needed.
chinna
Apperception is the precise term. Faith is not it. Faith is belief with no experience. Apperception is the reflective apprehension of the mind's own inner states. It is the unchangeable awareness that is a necessary precondition for all experiences. I'm not talking about empirical knowledge, but apperceptive knowledge. The "six lights" is described above are what this apperception is. The yogi can rest the mind in this "space of awareness" to "apperceive" THAT, the total clear light.
For Carson's benefit: don't assume we are debating knowledge. That would be pointless. This discussion is about method, just like pranayama or mantra. The method is first to know the landscape of awareness, to go there and rest there at all times. Like Chinna said, prana and knowledge are inseparable. What can be realized from the prana side can be realized from the knowledge side. Prana is the physical side of the mind's presence, movement and energy. The mind's presence realizes that energy. When the prana stills, there is silence, stillness, space, etc. You say silence, because that is one interpretation of the experience. One could say the prana stills or slows, depending on one's skill. It stills when the mind stops pursuing objects and is satisfied with itself...
The apperceptive awareness is always satisfied in itself, because it is the unchangeable cognitive precondition to experiencing all changeable experiences. Therefore it is always still and silent. When this is realized through practices or pointed out and stabilized through practices makes no difference. Once the clear light of awareness is fully understood, everything is the mandala of liberation, one's life is the total symbol of divinity. Because one's one realizes this, further meditative purification is just icing on the cake. One is liberated fully just by this awareness.
What validates any spiritual knowledge is whether is can benefit all beings throughout all dimensions. We are all joined at the dimension of the clear light, so suffusing all beings with this knowledge is just a matter of knowing it for oneself.
Adamant |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 05 2010 : 5:45:29 PM
|
P.S. Another useful term is metacognition, the knowledge of one's own awareness. One is aware of aspects of one's own awareness. Remaining with awareness of awareness (as has been aptly discussed on this forum previously) is the "path of no-path," because there is nothing to do other than "look" at one's own awareness.
Adamant |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 06 2010 : 08:24:51 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Apperception is the precise term. Faith is not it. Faith is belief with no experience. Apperception is the reflective apprehension of the mind's own inner states. It is the unchangeable awareness that is a necessary precondition for all experiences. I'm not talking about empirical knowledge, but apperceptive knowledge. The "six lights" is described above are what this apperception is. The yogi can rest the mind in this "space of awareness" to "apperceive" THAT, the total clear light.
For Carson's benefit: don't assume we are debating knowledge. That would be pointless. This discussion is about method, just like pranayama or mantra. The method is first to know the landscape of awareness, to go there and rest there at all times. Like Chinna said, prana and knowledge are inseparable. What can be realized from the prana side can be realized from the knowledge side. Prana is the physical side of the mind's presence, movement and energy. The mind's presence realizes that energy. When the prana stills, there is silence, stillness, space, etc. You say silence, because that is one interpretation of the experience. One could say the prana stills or slows, depending on one's skill. It stills when the mind stops pursuing objects and is satisfied with itself...
The apperceptive awareness is always satisfied in itself, because it is the unchangeable cognitive precondition to experiencing all changeable experiences. Therefore it is always still and silent. When this is realized through practices or pointed out and stabilized through practices makes no difference. Once the clear light of awareness is fully understood, everything is the mandala of liberation, one's life is the total symbol of divinity. Because one's one realizes this, further meditative purification is just icing on the cake. One is liberated fully just by this awareness.
What validates any spiritual knowledge is whether is can benefit all beings throughout all dimensions. We are all joined at the dimension of the clear light, so suffusing all beings with this knowledge is just a matter of knowing it for oneself.
Adamant
Thanks Adamant, I agree with all of that. It's better and more clearly expressed than I could manage, too. My crude conceptual formulations would no doubt have benefited from a more traditional and sustained buddhist education, but alas that never happened. I am glad you like Jean Klein's 'apperception'. He was deceptively simple of expression and modest in presence.
chinna |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 06 2010 : 08:37:00 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
P.S. Another useful term is metacognition, the knowledge of one's own awareness. One is aware of aspects of one's own awareness. Remaining with awareness of awareness (as has been aptly discussed on this forum previously) is the "path of no-path," because there is nothing to do other than "look" at one's own awareness.
Adamant
Yes, and what Nisargadatta points to, 'knows' as himself, is exactly that eternal awareness. He uses the term Awareness, for the beyond-consciousness, the beyond-Iamness.
The awareness of awareness when there is no awareness to be aware of. "I AM That I AM", as the bible puts it. The meta with no cognition. The unchangeable awareness. That is what the jnani points to as one's Self. Which is beyond nothingness or emptiness, and so excludes nothing.
Ah so, here we are again, only free and beyond death!
As you imply, these are not word games. We speak of method, experience, practice, in this. The method of no-method. The path of no-path. The nonsense of such words only makes perfect sense when they cut right through, from awareness to awareness. The power of the right words received in the right way, of mantra!
It could be imagined that such words are sophistry, if they are received at the cognitive level alone. But their contextual rigour and precision is pure love, compassion.
chinna |
Edited by - chinna on Jan 06 2010 09:45:59 AM |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Jan 06 2010 : 1:50:35 PM
|
Hi Chinna :)
Thank you for your response. It is very interesting to gain a perspective of your personal history and experiences.
quote:
Originally posted by chinna
Adams points to consciousness, which resolves into light, which is prior to THAT.
I'm a little confused here.. is not THAT prior to consciousness? Did you accidentally get these reversed?
quote:
I say with certainty that Adams and Nisargadatta are right in this.
From what does this certainty arise? Experience? Are you saying that you've experienced the THAT? I'm not doubting you or questioning any validity here. Your statement is very confident and I'm curious as to whether or not you have realized THAT.. (from your personal history disclosure, I would say that you have been one of the fortunate ones..)
quote:
The most powerful, me-shattering, kundalini experiences were following acauaintance with the early teaching of Da Free John, and his appearance to me 'in the subtle realms', so I regard him as my diksha guru (I never got into his cult, and never read him once these experiences arose, since I then felt a direct relationship). He had introduced me to Ramana, who introduced me to Nisargadatta, and then everything fell into place conceptually and I knew I was Home. This was formally confirmed by advaita-master Dr Vijai Shankar (before he became well-known, and once again I have never been part of his group) and so I regard him as my shiksha guru.
This is very interesting to me. Adi Da is known for the "Bright", and his video on his web page talks about how everything is light. Also, the Dr Vijai Shankar website introduction also talks about reality being composed of Light and Sound. I understand what you are saying, or at least I believe I understand what you are saying: that which is beyond the light is THAT, the light comes from the THAT and that THAT is apriori to experience.
Congratulations on arriving Home!
:)
TI |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 06 2010 : 3:48:17 PM
|
Hi Chinna, I didn't know about Jean Klein. I thought "apperception" was Kantian. But that's okay.
Apperception, "the halo around all thought," the crystalline matrix of all logical possibility, acausality, thought experiments. <-These are the modern Western "discoveries" by Kant, Hume, Wittgenstein, Newton, Gallileo and Einstein .
I highlight these, because these philosophers/scientists remain powerfully credible today. We know yoga is self-evident, but there is a way to make it evident. It has the capacity of repeatability. I am partly obsessed with non-dogmatic non-religious but objective language we can use to convey the teaching. There's a huge crowd of concrete thinkers who can use some genuine straight-forward experience.
Adamant |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 06 2010 : 9:19:59 PM
|
TI,
Any brief moment one remains undistracted in (let's say) "awareness of awareness," one has a direct experience of THAT. Let's leave confusing terms like consciousness aside. We all get "awareness."
It is the creeping distraction that takes one away from "apperception" of THAT, and pulls one by the nose into the land of circling, of awareness of this, that, other and such.
The practices working with prana are simply to create better internal conditions for nondistraction, relaxing, slowing, harmonizing the winds and allowing well-being to pervade the senses.
However, practicing awareness of awareness is what all the practices lead to. It's what meditation is when the mantra is released and the next mantra has not arisen. It is exactly the realization right now of simple self-reflexive awareness (awareness of awareness). THAT is all (no more), and you have no doubt already experienced it, along with everyone.
THAT is not mysterious in the sense that it is some far off difficult experience reserved for the few. Quite the opposite. THAT is really mundane, super-mundane, as in really really normal. As in the baseline of experience. All the variations of distractions are really each one of them a little abnormal freak accident (that make us freak and tweak and capture the winds of perception). They travel in a frequent series so we tend to think of them as regular.
My point is that we need to recognize the simplicity and ordinariness of THAT so we can have a reliable working basis for discussion, and also to have a down to earth understanding of what practices do.
Adamant |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Jan 06 2010 : 10:24:32 PM
|
Hi Admamant :)
Thank you for that. :)
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
TI,
Any brief moment one remains undistracted in (let's say) "awareness of awareness," one has a direct experience of THAT. Let's leave confusing terms like consciousness aside. We all get "awareness."
It is the creeping distraction that takes one away from "apperception" of THAT, and pulls one by the nose into the land of circling, of awareness of this, that, other and such.
Ok. I agree. Awareness is simple and more people can get that. I like "awareness watching awareness" (AWA) better than "apperception" though because the word apperception has slight variations depending on whether or not it's use is philosophical or epistemological..
I realize that this is what you are talking about. Gurudeva mentions awareness watching awareness in the "Merging With Siva" book.
It sounds to be the same practice:
link:http://www.himalayanacademy.com/res...s_ch-43.html
quote:
That is why you strive for mastery of sadhana, mastery of concentration, your ability to hold awareness where you want it, when you want it for as long as you want it, and mastery of your ability to experience kaif, pure awareness aware only of itself, by taking awareness out of the entire context into just being aware. This practice of kaif is one of the fundamental protectors from psychic or astralinvasion, for when you are in that state, great clarity and willpower persist and the lower states are transcended.
To attain and sustain kaif is a simple practice. You pull awareness out of the thought processes. You pull awareness out of the emotion processes. You pull awareness out of the bodily processes, and you're just completely on that pinnacle of being aware of being aware. That's so necessary to practice every day, even if you do it for a split second.
The experience of kaif can be attained by anyone on the face of the Earth, at least for a split second, because it's so easy to be aware of being aware. To hold that experience and to stabilize the physical and emotional elements long enough to hold that intensity for even a minute takes more practice -- not too much, but consistent practice. To maintain kaif for two minutes requires more effort, more will, more dedication to the life of sadhana. Five minutes requires more. That's the test.
I practice this a lot lately whenever I can think of it.
quote:
However, practicing awareness of awareness is what all the practices lead to. It's what meditation is when the mantra is released and the next mantra has not arisen. It is exactly the realization right now of simple self-reflexive awareness (awareness of awareness). THAT is all (no more), and you have no doubt already experienced it, along with everyone.
THAT is not mysterious in the sense that it is some far off difficult experience reserved for the few. Quite the opposite. THAT is really mundane, super-mundane, as in really really normal. As in the baseline of experience. All the variations of distractions are really each one of them a little abnormal freak accident (that make us freak and tweak and capture the winds of perception). They travel in a frequent series so we tend to think of them as regular.
Yes, I understand. What you have written is very easy to understand.. :)
I have a slight question with this statement: quote:
However, practicing awareness of awareness is what all the practices lead to.
That's not the final goal is it? Isn't the final goal of all practices to become stable in practicing awareness of awareness to the point that you can then control your viewpoint or your focus of perception within awareness? Then can you realize your true self? Or does the attainment of awareness of awareness grant knowledge of everything without having to focus or change one's viewpoint? Or does the attainment of AWA produce buddhist emptiness where there is nothing to see?
According to Adi Da, if we had the ability to change our viewpoint to that point prior to the creation of the world of forms (let's call it zero point where there is no time or space), we would become realized. We are stuck in our multiple view points, none of which is point zero. Once we stabilize in AWA and gain control over directing and sustaining our awareness, is not the next step to shift your awareness to point zero?
:)
TI |
|
|
|
adamantclearlight
USA
410 Posts |
Posted - Jan 07 2010 : 08:51:04 AM
|
Hi TI, Okay let's say "AWA" is the viewpoint. There's not another. What the practice is about is just the same as pranayam and DM. By practicing AWA you will purify your channels and chakras, the fruit of enlightenment will ripen naturally. There's no need to say what that is or to engage in further metaphysical dialectic: "divine outpouring of love" and refining the senses as Yogani says.
Adamant |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 07 2010 : 3:31:23 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Hi Chinna :)
I'm a little confused here.. is not THAT prior to consciousness? Did you accidentally get these reversed?
From what does this certainty arise? Experience? Are you saying that you've experienced the THAT? I'm not doubting you or questioning any validity here. Your statement is very confident and I'm curious as to whether or not you have realized THAT.. (from your personal history disclosure, I would say that you have been one of the fortunate ones..)
I understand what you are saying, or at least I believe I understand what you are saying: that which is beyond the light is THAT, the light comes from the THAT and that THAT is apriori to experience.
Congratulations on arriving Home!
:)
TI
Dear TI
Thanks. Yes, sorry to confuse. I was comparing two different 'directions':
THAT as prior to everything, from the point of view of creation, or of the experience of the realised;
light as prior to THAT from the point of view of the spiritual path, according to Adams.
I can only say that I am completely confident, that all doubt has disappeared. To know THAT is not to know or experience 'something'. It is simply the vanishing of doubt, of the confusions of duality. The 'something' is the problem, the confusions. It's about dropping all that, or rather all that just vanishing. To quote my beloved Nisargadatta:
'Freedom is the surrender of all self-concern. It cannot be done. It HAPPENS, when you realise your true nature.'
Yes, you have understood correctly. So, imagine you had not been born, or have died, and that every experience you have ever had or can imagine having, including all blisses and lights and every other subtlety, including knowing anything, even nothingness or emptiness, including every aspect of your sense of self, are no more. That is as close as the mind can get.
I love the symbolism of the goddess Chinnamasta - she cuts her own head off and puts it under her arm and bliss and light pour from her severed neck. She stands upon a copulating couple. What the jnani points to may seem very austere, but it is not at all 'dead', it is Life Itself. Our love of life is misplaced in our own little self and its designs.
Like Douglas Harding - the Man With No Head.
peace and joy
chinna |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 07 2010 : 3:46:29 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by adamantclearlight
Hi Chinna, I didn't know about Jean Klein. I thought "apperception" was Kantian. But that's okay.
Apperception, "the halo around all thought," the crystalline matrix of all logical possibility, acausality, thought experiments. <-These are the modern Western "discoveries" by Kant, Hume, Wittgenstein, Newton, Gallileo and Einstein .
I highlight these, because these philosophers/scientists remain powerfully credible today. We know yoga is self-evident, but there is a way to make it evident. It has the capacity of repeatability. I am partly obsessed with non-dogmatic non-religious but objective language we can use to convey the teaching. There's a huge crowd of concrete thinkers who can use some genuine straight-forward experience.
Adamant
Hear, hear. Wittgenstein also KNEW, at least in his later phase.
We need to convey to this age, as someone once said, that 'there is nothing so effective as good philosophy'.
One good sign, at least in the UK, is that the fastest growing school examination syllabuses have, for about a decade, been in religion and philosophy. Religion from a non-dogmatic view point. To rethink the big questions. And this trend ran counter to Government policy and schools' expectations. It comes from the kids.
chinna
|
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 07 2010 : 4:24:43 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
That's not the final goal is it? Isn't the final goal of all practices to become stable in practicing awareness of awareness to the point that you can then control your viewpoint or your focus of perception within awareness? Then can you realize your true self? Or does the attainment of awareness of awareness grant knowledge of everything without having to focus or change one's viewpoint? Or does the attainment of AWA produce buddhist emptiness where there is nothing to see?
According to Adi Da, if we had the ability to change our viewpoint to that point prior to the creation of the world of forms (let's call it zero point where there is no time or space), we would become realized. We are stuck in our multiple view points, none of which is point zero. Once we stabilize in AWA and gain control over directing and sustaining our awareness, is not the next step to shift your awareness to point zero?
:)
TI
Yes, stabilise in AWA. When awareness is truly of awareness, which is non-dual, it is the same thing as 'knowing the Self', the same non-duality. When one is aware of non-duality, even momentarily, the self-reflexive structure falls away, the falsehood of the self-as-thing is seen through. Point zero is that. Then we don't know that we know. We are not aware that we are aware. We are not self-conscious. We are spontaneous, the natural state. The story of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 in the Bible, the statement of the humen problem, has been reversed. We are back in Eden. Where we belong.
This is what Nisargadatta and UG call 'awareness' beyond consciousness:
"If you could be in a state of awareness for a single moment once in your life the continuity would be snapped, the illusion of the experiencing structure, the you, would collapse and everything would fall into the natural rhythmn. In this state you do not know that you are looking at. That is awareness. If you recognise what you are looking at you are there again experiencing the old, what you know.....It's acausal. It is not an act of volition on your part. You can't bring it about. There is absolutely nothing you can do." (UGKrishnamurti)
J Krishnamurti said the same, the ending of our thrall to the 'old', to dead thoughts, crystallised, stuck, and to see the whole, be in the flow, naturally, without getting in the way.
We can of course prepare ourselves to be overtaken, superceded by this Obviousness, to be worthy to receive the Truth, just as the traditions have always said, by knowing, loving, believing, etc, beyond limits. We can break down the 'self-contraction', the 'clench on the light', as Da said, and modelled in his own life, so persistently.
chinna |
Edited by - chinna on Jan 07 2010 4:39:03 PM |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 07 2010 : 5:39:07 PM
|
"A quiet mind is all you need. All else will happen rightly, once your mind is quiet. As the sun on rising makes the world active, so does self-awareness affect changes in the mind. In the light of calm and steady self-awareness, inner energies wake up and work miracles without any effort on your part. Do understand that you are destined for enlightenment. Co-operate with your destiny, don't go against it, don't thwart it. Allow it to fulfill itself. All you have to do is to give attention to the obstacles created by the foolish mind."
Om namo Nisargadatta Maharaj!
chinna
|
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4381 Posts |
Posted - Jan 07 2010 : 7:09:00 PM
|
quote:
On a point of information, I did mean gnostics and not agnostics. Certainly the historical gnostic christian groups of the early church centuries often promoted a sharp dualism, with creation the work of a lesser, evil god, and gnostic practitioners seeking a disembodied 'spiritual' state reflecting their view of the ultimate God, ie a very non-trinitarian understanding of God.
It's belief in the existence of, or pursuit of, special 'spiritual realms', between this one and the Absolute, that tend to cause the body/humanity to be downgraded, or the Absolute to be stopped short of, and thus enlightenment to be missed. That's why it seems important to me.
Hi Chinna and all,
Well, there were many Gnostic Christian schools, so I guess anything is possible, but this doesn’t really reflect my understanding of Gnostic Christian thought around the time of Christ.
In “The Holy book of the Great Invisible spirit” we find the characters of Sakla and Nebrouel being given the duty of reigning over chaos and Hades. Sakla was a great angel, and Nebrouel a demon. These two figures come quite a way down in the creation hierarchy, being below Sophia, the archangels, the luminaries, Seth and Adamas. All of these persons and aspects of creation in turn proceeded from the Father, the creator.
In my experience this system is quite typical of Gnostic Christian thought, with the Father being the creator God and lesser beings (created by Him) playing various roles in the Creation. There are obvious parallels between Nebrouel and Lucifer in modern Christianity. So I wouldn’t say, based on what I know of Gnostic Christianity that it is a system with two Gods, a good, transcendental one and a lesser evil creator God; but rather a Monotheism with a complex understanding of both the structure of and causation within the celestial realms and the lower realms of being.
As I am sure you are aware, the Trinity was really a later development within the Christian Church. It very much involved the stripping of the power and the importance of the Divine feminine from Christian thought. So I wouln't necessarily critisize the Gnostic Christians for being non-Trinitarian, if anything it may well be to their credit.
I also wouldn’t say that Gnostic Christianity as a whole in the early days was focussed on the attainment of a disembodied spiritual state, unless by disembodied you mean “de-physicalized”. There was the knowledge of the higher, subtle bodies of divine light and of course many of the Christian Gnostic texts are transcriptions of teachings given by Jesus Christ after his physical death, whilst he was living in a subtle body of divine light. But the attainment of such a body, at least in the Gnostic scriptures that I am familiar with, was not presented as a goal of the spiritual path. Rather the goal was the attainment of the Christos, or the consciousness of Christ through which the Gnostic practitioner became one with the Father.
quote:
Thanks Christi. I think we present two slightly different viewpoints, reflecting the traditions in which have found ourselves. But they are only viewpoints.
I think, as Adamant pointed out, in relation to the subject of bliss, this is really a teaching issue. The question does not seem to be “is bliss a quality of enlightenment?” but rather “should bliss be mentioned, given the potential pitfalls involved?”. It seems to me even some of the great advaita teachers are divided on this point. Some, such as Nisargadatta and Papaji do not mention it, or speak of it as something which must be transcended. Others, such as Ramana Maharshi, Osho, and Adi Da almost make the realisation of bliss the hallmark of their teaching. Adi Da’s description of the enlightened state was as an “Inherent love-blissful unity”. And Ramana Maharshi wrote poems about the bliss-filled nature of the realisation of the true Self as Brahman:
quote:
The Sun of Self shines bright and real in the vast Heart-expanse.
Darkness dies, afflictions end, and bliss wells up...
The Self shines of it's own accord.
Such Self-awareness is the only Heaven,
This stillness, this abode of Bliss...
Seeing this Self within as Awareness' lightning flash;
The play of Grace; the ego's death; The blossoming of Bliss...
And behold the effulgence of the Self within;
The experience of eternity; absence of all fear;
the ocean vast of Bliss...
The being which contains, reveals, perceives
The inner sky which shines within the Heart.
When the mind, free of thought turns inward,
Annamalai appears as my own Self.
True grace is needed; Love is added.
Bliss wells up...
[Atma Vidya: Ramana Maharshi]
I think the real problem is that we only have one word for bliss, in the same way that we only have one word for light. Yogani once said that one day we will have 20 names for samadhi, to describe the different subtleties involved as samadhi becomes more and more a common reality. One day we may well have 20 words for bliss, to differentiate between lower bliss states which need to be transcended, and the higher bliss states which accompany Self realization.
Lets see. 
Christi
|
Edited by - Christi on Jan 08 2010 07:07:58 AM |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 08 2010 : 10:31:25 AM
|
Thanks Christi. My direct knowledge of gnostic early church sources is limited. I am relying on what I was taught thirty years ago by some very grand and convincing church historians and theologians in Oxford and Cambridge. Of course, they were orthodox Christians of high institutional office as well as scholars, and male.....
But I am not really interested in the academic argument, nor indeed knowledge ABOUT things at all, hence my withdrawal from an exchange that seemed to be heading in that direction. It is, to me at least, of no significance whether I am right or you are right or neither of us are right about gnostics!
My bliss-enquiry is only concerned with fellow travellers who may be reifying bliss and could be helped to be free of such an unnecessary conceptual and therefore experiential limitation by the persistent intervention of the non-dual jnana perspective. The comments arise, presumably, because I sense that this is an issue.
From my perspective, multiplying words for bliss could only multiply the pitfalls of reification and lead to even more confusion. Like there always seem to be more samadhis, all claiming to be the ultimate, all making seekers feel that something even more rarefied has to be experienced in order for them to properly be or know THEMSELVES! How absurd! The problem is the words. What we need to know is The Word, the unstruck sound. The words point and then we need to enquire, deconstruct, throw them away.
This thread, interestingly, reminded me how much the teaching intent of this perspective shares with that of the christian construct of the Trinity, and indeed the orthodox christian critique of 'gnosticism' (valid or not).
Well, we'll see for sure that the advaita-jnana words will still keep coming from here, just as the beautiful and knowledgeable words of other yoga perspectives will keep coming from there!
Thanks again for the exchange.
chinna |
Edited by - chinna on Jan 08 2010 10:58:00 AM |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4381 Posts |
Posted - Jan 08 2010 : 11:44:25 AM
|
Hi Chinna,
quote:
Thanks Christi. My direct knowledge of gnostic early church sources is limited. I am relying on what I was taught thirty years ago by some very grand and convincing church historians and theologians in Oxford and Cambridge. Of course, they were orthodox Christians of high institutional office as well as scholars, and male.....
Ah yes, Orthodox Christians are not always the best sourse of knowledge about Gnostic Christianity, and vice versa. Best to go directly to the scriptures, or even better, find a practicing Gnostic Christian. In truth, Gnostic Christianity is such a diverse area (including different schools of thought) that it is hard to make any generalisations about it, other than that it is not considered orthodox by the orthodox church.
quote:
My bliss-enquiry is only concerned with fellow travellers who may be reifying bliss and could be helped to be free of such an unnecessary conceptual and therefore experiential limitation by the persistent intervention of the non-dual jnana perspective. The comments arise, presumably, because I sense that this is an issue.
Let go of all perceived issues and reside in the Self alone.
See, I can do jnana too. 
quote:
Well, we'll see for sure that the advaita-jnana words will still keep coming from here, just as the beautiful and knowledgeable words of other yoga perspectives will keep coming from there!
Looking forward to it.
Christi |
Edited by - Christi on Jan 08 2010 3:20:57 PM |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Jan 08 2010 : 4:01:05 PM
|
Hi Christi :)
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
And Ramana Maharshi wrote poems about the bliss-filled nature of the realisation of the true Self as Brahman:
Quote
The Sun of Self shines bright and real in the vast Heart-expanse.
Darkness dies, afflictions end, and bliss wells up...
The Self shines of it's own accord.
Such Self-awareness is the only Heaven,
This stillness, this abode of Bliss...
Seeing this Self within as Awareness' lightning flash;
The play of Grace; the ego's death; The blossoming of Bliss...
And behold the effulgence of the Self within;
The experience of eternity; absence of all fear;
the ocean vast of Bliss...
The being which contains, reveals, perceives
The inner sky which shines within the Heart.
When the mind, free of thought turns inward,
Annamalai appears as my own Self.
True grace is needed; Love is added.
Bliss wells up...
[Atma Vidya: Ramana Maharshi]
End Quote
This is so beautiful. Thanks for posting this. :)
TI |
|
|
|
Tibetan_Ice
Canada
758 Posts |
Posted - Jan 08 2010 : 4:25:25 PM
|
Hi Chinna :)
quote:
I love the symbolism of the goddess Chinnamasta - she cuts her own head off and puts it under her arm and bliss and light pour from her severed neck. She stands upon a copulating couple. What the jnani points to may seem very austere, but it is not at all 'dead', it is Life Itself. Our love of life is misplaced in our own little self and its designs.
I was shocked when I saw the pictures of Chinnamasta on Google! Yet a part of me wished I could do that too... such a sense of finality.
Well thank you for cutting off your head and bleeding on us! :)
Do you think that even though a person is an avatar (self declared or not) they may still incur karma while in the earth plane? (Adi Da)
:)
TI |
|
|
|
Christi
United Kingdom
4381 Posts |
Posted - Jan 08 2010 : 7:47:28 PM
|
Hi TI,
quote:
This is so beautiful. Thanks for posting this. :)
You're welcome. It was a highly abridged version. The whole poem, and many more can be found in "The complete works of Ramana Maharshi" which is an amazing book.
Christi |
Edited by - Christi on Jan 09 2010 5:11:15 PM |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 09 2010 : 4:48:16 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tibetan_Ice
Hi Chinna :)
quote:
I love the symbolism of the goddess Chinnamasta - she cuts her own head off and puts it under her arm and bliss and light pour from her severed neck. She stands upon a copulating couple. What the jnani points to may seem very austere, but it is not at all 'dead', it is Life Itself. Our love of life is misplaced in our own little self and its designs.
I was shocked when I saw the pictures of Chinnamasta on Google! Yet a part of me wished I could do that too... such a sense of finality.
Well thank you for cutting off your head and bleeding on us! :)
Do you think that even though a person is an avatar (self declared or not) they may still incur karma while in the earth plane? (Adi Da)
:)
TI
The jnani knows him/herself as the Absolute, beyond cause and effect. Find yourself beyond your limited identity with body-mind and then who would be there to take delivery of karma? You have to achieve nothing - you are already THAT. When you see this, you will no longer believe in karma.
chinna |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jan 09 2010 : 5:03:27 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christi
See, I can do jnana too.
Christi
Jnana cannot be done. It happens. It can only be witnessed.[;)
It happens to you too, for sure!
chinna
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
What Does Practicing No Path Mean?
