Why is it so difficult to reach Nibbana?

[trd]

I'm still puzzled about your meditation practice. Doesn't it take you to momentary periods of no thought? If it did, didn't you recover your ability to think?

Again, I was being a bit provocative, or 'tongue-in-cheek'. I was trying to suggest that the joyful experience of Nirvana, or of true self, might be so alluring that my body would decide to stay there. Pure speculation on my part.

Before enlightenment, chop wood carry water

After enlightenment, chop wood carry water

Zen Saying

Edited June 9, 2014 by trd

[VincentRJ]

I'm still puzzled about your meditation practice. Doesn't it take you to momentary periods of no thought? If it did, didn't you recover your ability to think?

Again, I was being a bit provocative, or 'tongue-in-cheek'. I was trying to suggest that the joyful experience of Nirvana, or of true self, might be so alluring that my body would decide to stay there. Pure speculation on my part.

Before enlightenment, chop wood carry water

After enlightenment, chop wood carry water

Zen Saying

There are different sects of Buddhism. I think I had in mind the concept of the Bodhisattva who makes a deliberate choice to remain on earth in order to help others, rather than depart into the absolute.

[trd]

There are different sects of Buddhism. I think I had in mind the concept of the Bodhisattva who makes a deliberate choice to remain on earth in order to help others, rather than depart into the absolute.

Is that comment not related to your previous comment when you expressed this fear:

I'm not sure I want to go that far. If I completely lose self-awareness, how can I decide when to end that deep trance? I might stay there till I die.

To which Rocky answered:

I'm still puzzled about your meditation practice. Doesn't it take you to momentary periods of no thought? If it did, didn't you recover your ability to think?

Hence my Zen comment which is saying that you continue to fully function as a human being. You have expressed a commonly held fear that somehow you will lose all awareness of the outside world and turn into some kind of zombie. This could not be further from the truth. In fact you become more integrated, more efficient and more productive in every way because all action emanates from a state of absolute contentment and peace. Most people have had glimpses of this when carrying out some task with a feeling of complete abandonment where it feels as if the task is taking care of itself without much involvement from the "doer". This is liberating. However at other times even the most simple task feels like you are wading through jelly. It is important to reflect on these experiences as a way of seeing what is possible through practice. Edited June 9, 2014 by trd

[sabaijai]

Getting back to the original topic of this thread, I recently read a book that cuts to the chase quickly, No Self, No Problem.

This review encapsulates the narrative well. I downloaded a Kindle version of the book

http://www.bohemianbuddhistreview.com/noselfnoproblem.html

[VincentRJ]

There are different sects of Buddhism. I think I had in mind the concept of the Bodhisattva who makes a deliberate choice to remain on earth in order to help others, rather than depart into the absolute.

Is that comment not related to your previous comment when you expressed this fear:

I'm not sure I want to go that far. If I completely lose self-awareness, how can I decide when to end that deep trance? I might stay there till I die.

To which Rocky answered:

I'm still puzzled about your meditation practice. Doesn't it take you to momentary periods of no thought? If it did, didn't you recover your ability to think?

Hence my Zen comment which is saying that you continue to fully function as a human being. You have expressed a commonly held fear that somehow you will lose all awareness of the outside world and turn into some kind of zombie. This could not be further from the truth. In fact you become more integrated, more efficient and more productive in every way because all action emanates from a state of absolute contentment and peace. Most people have had glimpses of this when carrying out some task with a feeling of complete abandonment where it feels as if the task is taking care of itself without much involvement from the "doer". This is liberating. However at other times even the most simple task feels like you are wading through jelly. It is important to reflect on these experiences as a way of seeing what is possible through practice.

I see! In that case, I have nothing to fear. Thanks for the confirmation., Trd.

[trd]

Getting back to the original topic of this thread, I recently read a book that cuts to the chase quickly, No Self, No Problem.

This review encapsulates the narrative well. I downloaded a Kindle version of the book

http://www.bohemianbuddhistreview.com/noselfnoproblem.html

Looks like a good read. I read the synopsis of the book and completely agree with his message.

Thubten elaborates: "It means don't lose awareness. I love that expression . . . be still and sturdy and strong and disciplined in terms of maintaining that fire-like awareness in each and every moment. Once awareness is achieved then [it] is self-sustained . . . [awareness] becomes effortless."

While it rarely happens without dedicated practice, awareness is the tool that will enable us to transcend and eradicate "all of our concepts and limiting ideas." We first must realize that "whenever we believe that we have a problem, whenever we believe that we are real, the mind is actually lying to us . . . ego is tricking us into believing" in an illusion.

Edited June 9, 2014 by trd

[arjunadawn]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?" I realize that within the scope of his exposures and studies, this information comports with what he knows to be the many and varied worlds and approaches to Nibbana. However, I have a very different take.

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone, but that is not necessarily the best way. It is, however, the most tried and true practice for the greatest amount of people to achieve such a goal. Yet it can all be distilled down to choice. When a person elects to "see," to really see the world around them, to grasp its impermanence and futility (and this is likely to be in accord with Buddhist teachings), and this motivates them to transcend, then the choices on this path needn't be so convoluted. With discipline, detachment, observation, and the basic tools of understanding the construction of the mind to enable functioning as a human on autopilot, one can then transcend very deeply by "choice" alone. It is choice! It is the determination to "see" things as they really are. In so seeing, context showers the observer, and detachment increasingly exponentially. Without any doubt, to frame the issue as "Why is it so difficult to reach Nibbana?" one creates difficulty in "reach[ing] Nibbana. When this is the goal you will surely miss the signpost. This is why sages for millennia have pointed out many will achieve this state only to linger, get lost, get heady, and travel no further. Nirvana is a state of ecstasy whereby one is still a part of the sensory experience. The prize lies further; and it is all choice! I believe the prize can be attained in a vacuum.

[rockyysdt]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?" I realize that within the scope of his exposures and studies, this information comports with what he knows to be the many and varied worlds and approaches to Nibbana. However, I have a very different take.

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone, but that is not necessarily the best way. It is, however, the most tried and true practice for the greatest amount of people to achieve such a goal. Yet it can all be distilled down to choice. When a person elects to "see," to really see the world around them, to grasp its impermanence and futility (and this is likely to be in accord with Buddhist teachings), and this motivates them to transcend, then the choices on this path needn't be so convoluted. With discipline, detachment, observation, and the basic tools of understanding the construction of the mind to enable functioning as a human on autopilot, one can then transcend very deeply by "choice" alone. It is choice! It is the determination to "see" things as they really are. In so seeing, context showers the observer, and detachment increasingly exponentially. Without any doubt, to frame the issue as "Why is it so difficult to reach Nibbana?" one creates difficulty in "reach[ing] Nibbana. When this is the goal you will surely miss the signpost. This is why sages for millennia have pointed out many will achieve this state only to linger, get lost, get heady, and travel no further. Nirvana is a state of ecstasy whereby one is still a part of the sensory experience. The prize lies further; and it is all choice! I believe the prize can be attained in a vacuum.

I see what you are saying A.

I am bathed in this at the moment.

I have a number of choices/decisions to make, but dwell upon the impact of making one over the other.

With karuna in mind I labour over my decisions, knowing the wrong choice is to fool/cheat myself and be unfaithful to chosen teachings.

However, being on vacation I have greater poise to think and choose.

Normally, in the heat of the moment we often choose incorrectly without thought.

This is why, for me, the practice of, mindfulness and 5 precepts is important.

Without these I don't have the composure to choose wisely.

[arjunadawn]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?" I realize that within the scope of his exposures and studies, this information comports with what he knows to be the many and varied worlds and approaches to Nibbana. However, I have a very different take.

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone, but that is not necessarily the best way. It is, however, the most tried and true practice for the greatest amount of people to achieve such a goal. Yet it can all be distilled down to choice. When a person elects to "see," to really see the world around them, to grasp its impermanence and futility (and this is likely to be in accord with Buddhist teachings), and this motivates them to transcend, then the choices on this path needn't be so convoluted. With discipline, detachment, observation, and the basic tools of understanding the construction of the mind to enable functioning as a human on autopilot, one can then transcend very deeply by "choice" alone. It is choice! It is the determination to "see" things as they really are. In so seeing, context showers the observer, and detachment increasingly exponentially. Without any doubt, to frame the issue as "Why is it so difficult to reach Nibbana?" one creates difficulty in "reach[ing] Nibbana. When this is the goal you will surely miss the signpost. This is why sages for millennia have pointed out many will achieve this state only to linger, get lost, get heady, and travel no further. Nirvana is a state of ecstasy whereby one is still a part of the sensory experience. The prize lies further; and it is all choice! I believe the prize can be attained in a vacuum.

I see what you are saying A.

I am bathed in this at the moment.

I have a number of choices/decisions to make, but dwell upon the impact of making one over the other.

With karuna in mind I labour over my decisions, knowing the wrong choice is to fool/cheat myself and be unfaithful to chosen teachings.

However, being on vacation I have greater poise to think and choose.

Normally, in the heat of the moment we often choose incorrectly without thought.

This is why, for me, the practice of, mindfulness and 5 precepts is important.

Without these I don't have the composure to choose wisely.

Hello. Reading your post I was alarmed. So many references to choice, I thought. So much paralysis. "Wait," I thought. "Did I speak of choice?"

Of course I did but I fear I left wrong impression. I only mean to say the goal is intended by choice... The road we then walk is choice. I suppose your comments reflect this- maybe- it just seemed... a lot of work to be you.

I never labor, never regret, and even though my life has intermittently been horrible and beautiful I've never made an incorrect decision. Where I am is exactly where I'm meant to me. I cannot be true or not to any teaching because they are all the products of others who know much, but not all. The road is meant to be walked uniquely, with curious detachment and wonder, not trepidation and paralysis from choice.

There will never be a teaching that will get you from here to forever (blasphemer), but may get you over the horizon. From this place, over the horizon of attainment, few who get so far return. We presume "the teaching" got them to forever. We presume a million choices aided their effort. This is erroneous. It's understandable to think so but not helpful because at a certain point even "teachings" must be shed and you go forth alone. With a right intent, right heart, clean life (and not just a clean life because it's a precept, rather because it's just your manner; you can't be otherwise) and stunning grasp of "context" a simple choice is required to walk the path. (I maintain 'context' is the single greatest tool for penetrating the veil). Once having chosen you needn't struggle and wring your mental hands over subsequent myriad choices; this is paralysis, not detachment. A person who actually elects to be kind, true, declare the world they will see, and assert they will know them self, has no need of guilt, consternation, sin, or worry of errors. Whatever happens... happens... it just is.

If you can clean your mind and heart, retrospectively unclutter the furniture from your emotional closet, shake the false paradigms from the tree of thought...abide like this- then you've little need for many choices; follow whatever teaching you may, but the day will come when they grow heavy like a chain vest. The first step is realizing everything you've ever been taught is mostly wrong (this was my experience).

[trd]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?"

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone..."...

You make a distinction between enlightenment and nirvana when there is none. Edited June 11, 2014 by trd

[arjunadawn]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?"

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone..."...

You make a distinction between enlightenment and nirvana when there is none.

Yes, I do. And no, I don't know better. I just think I blend too easily neidan concepts with Buddhist concepts- and I do assert nirvana isn't the end. It's academic but your point is valid.

For me, if that works, fine. But I should use common language we all agree upon if discussing something with others. Fair point. I've spent past few years exploring Taoist yoga and there's a slightly different step at the 'end.'

[arjunadawn]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?"

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone..."...

You make a distinction between enlightenment and nirvana when there is none.

I should trust my experience more than my desire to accommodate; I was correct. The distinction is not just within Taoist yoga neidan- "surrendering up into 10,000 places." This same additional 'choice' exists after attaining freedom from attachment, identifying, etc. Nirvana is a place, a stage, a landmark, and only few will travel further- but one may continue further to enlightenment. This concept is not fractured into a recent genre I've studied- neidan; it's foundational to a number of Hindu/Buddhist disciplines.

Aiming for nirvana, for me, would be like aiming for heaven. The mere thought of spending a lifetime of penetration only to reach as far as heaven is discouraging. I'd much prefer to seek the prize, to find God, to blend into the infinite. Heaven is a place where yet God is still not- it's a locale, a state of existence/perception. I'd much rather move on. From nirvana you can still imagine forever. In forever you can no longer imagine- all just is. This is enlightenment. (As I've distilled my studies).

[trd]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?"

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone..."...

You make a distinction between enlightenment and nirvana when there is none.

I should trust my experience more than my desire to accommodate; I was correct. The distinction is not just within Taoist yoga neidan- "surrendering up into 10,000 places." This same additional 'choice' exists after attaining freedom from attachment, identifying, etc. Nirvana is a place, a stage, a landmark, and only few will travel further- but one may continue further to enlightenment. This concept is not fractured into a recent genre I've studied- neidan; it's foundational to a number of Hindu/Buddhist disciplines.

Aiming for nirvana, for me, would be like aiming for heaven. The mere thought of spending a lifetime of penetration only to reach as far as heaven is discouraging. I'd much prefer to seek the prize, to find God, to blend into the infinite. Heaven is a place where yet God is still not- it's a locale, a state of existence/perception. I'd much rather move on. From nirvana you can still imagine forever. In forever you can no longer imagine- all just is. This is enlightenment. (As I've distilled my studies).

Whether you choose to call it moksha, jivanmukti, nirvana (sanskrit), nibbana (pali), satori, self realization or perhaps the wu wei of taoism that interests you, this state, but which is not a state, is the falling away of the identification as a person who is limited to mind and body and who is bound or attached to objects. The idea of "levels" such as enlightenment and nirvana is erroneous. It comes about because it is common to catch fleeting glimpses of the infinite silence which is our true nature. This yoga of silence is the practice that leads to being permanently established in it. It is the falling away of all concepts, to be free to interact in the word without attachment and suffering. Once established it is irreversable. There are no doubts, no debates. You and Rocky both spoke about making choices. The only choice you have to make is to kill the mind. Then you will know. Your true state is choiceless awareness. Edited June 11, 2014 by trd

[trd]

I should trust my experience more than my desire to accommodate.

Don't trust your experience. All experience is born of ignorance. It changes, it comes and goes, it depends on who or what has influenced you in your life. These are all impermanent. Trust the silence within which is unchanging.

[trd]

Aiming for nirvana, for me, would be like aiming for heaven.

If you don't know what nirvana is how do you know what to aim for? If you don't know what heaven is how do you know what to aim for? These are just mental concepts. You must get rid of them. They have no meaning.

[arjunadawn]

The OP wrote a fabulous introduction to the question "Why is it so difficult to reach Nirvana?"

We could learn all the Buddhist tenets and tools for reaching enlightenment, for which Nirvana is but a stepping stone..."...

You make a distinction between enlightenment and nirvana when there is none.

I should trust my experience more than my desire to accommodate; I was correct. The distinction is not just within Taoist yoga neidan- "surrendering up into 10,000 places." This same additional 'choice' exists after attaining freedom from attachment, identifying, etc. Nirvana is a place, a stage, a landmark, and only few will travel further- but one may continue further to enlightenment. This concept is not fractured into a recent genre I've studied- neidan; it's foundational to a number of Hindu/Buddhist disciplines.

Aiming for nirvana, for me, would be like aiming for heaven. The mere thought of spending a lifetime of penetration only to reach as far as heaven is discouraging. I'd much prefer to seek the prize, to find God, to blend into the infinite. Heaven is a place where yet God is still not- it's a locale, a state of existence/perception. I'd much rather move on. From nirvana you can still imagine forever. In forever you can no longer imagine- all just is. This is enlightenment. (As I've distilled my studies).

Whether you choose to call it moksha, jivanmukti, nirvana (sanskrit), nibbana (pali), satori, self realization or perhaps the wu wei of taoism that interests you, this state, but which is not a state, is the falling away of the identification as a person who is limited to mind and body and who is bound or attached to objects. The idea of "levels" such as enlightenment and nirvana is erroneous. It comes about because it is common to catch fleeting glimpses of the infinite silence which is our true nature. This yoga of silence is the practice that leads to being permanently established in it. It is the falling away of all concepts, to be free to interact in the word without attachment and suffering. Once established it is irreversable. There are no doubts, no debates. You and Rocky both spoke about making choices. The only choice you have to make is to kill the mind. Then you will know. Your true state is choiceless awareness.

You have stated this much more clearly then it even appears to my thinking; thank you. Sometimes when choosing words I run afoul. Other times, I simply choose the wrong words. Still, sometimes I am just incorrect. Thank you. I will actually sit with this a bit and read your other posts shortly. Thank you.

[arjunadawn]

Aiming for nirvana, for me, would be like aiming for heaven.

If you don't know what nirvana is how do you know what to aim for? If you don't know what heaven is how do you know what to aim for? These are just mental concepts. You must get rid of them. They have no meaning.

My comment regarding heaven is based on my previous exposures in life to a judo Christian concept, which I always rejected. I am not maligning; I just personally rejected it. I'd always noted that Christian concept of heaven always had 'access' to god, or presence 'in' god, but never the surrendering, sublimating, or communion in godhead I'd always believed self evidently was possible. So, as for an explanation, I'd always perceived heaven as nearly 'there,' but not. Clearly my analogy didn't fit the topic of nirvana as a separate state from enlightenment; but this was my first analogy.

I don't think it's accurate to presume any man does not or has not glimpsed what we are calling nirvana. It is not a lofty, aloof place for sages and textbooks. I dare say a number of people have glimpsed this stillness. I would even suspect that many 'searchers' had previously had at least samadhi like experiences that continue to urge them on, through the years, like a moth looking for a flame.

To the last poster who noted Rocky and my comments on "choice," thanks. It really provoked some new thinking; or review.

[trd]

You have stated this much more clearly then it even appears to my thinking; thank you. Sometimes when choosing words I run afoul. Other times, I simply choose the wrong words. Still, sometimes I am just incorrect. Thank you. I will actually sit with this a bit and read your other posts shortly. Thank you.

You are most welcome arjunadawn. Your avatar name reminds me of the dialogue between Arjuna and Lord Krishna in the Bahagavad Gita which everyone should read.

I have been writing on this subject for the past four months or so in various threads in the Buddhism forum. I am always stating the same simple truth.

Edited June 11, 2014 by trd

[trd]

When it says in the Bible, "the Kingdom of Heaven is within you, I often think the real meaning is understood better by Buddhists and Hindus than Christians.

I think that Christianity lost its experiential aspect after it became subjegated to Roman influence as a way of elevating their emporers to God status and as a way of controlling the populace.

Edited June 11, 2014 by trd

[trd]

One more point to add to what I said about having fleeting glimpses of realization, which is common. Although not permanent, they can neverthless produce quite significant shifts in perception. Zen literature seems to recognise this more than most when they speak of satoris of which there can be many. That's why some talk about levels. But ultimately there is either temporary samadhi or permanently established samadhi. The natural state of sahaj samadhi. At that point is the end of seeking.

Edited June 11, 2014 by trd

[arjunadawn]

You have stated this much more clearly then it even appears to my thinking; thank you. Sometimes when choosing words I run afoul. Other times, I simply choose the wrong words. Still, sometimes I am just incorrect. Thank you. I will actually sit with this a bit and read your other posts shortly. Thank you.

You are most welcome arjunadawn. Your avatar name reminds me of the dialogue between Arjuna and Lord Krishna in the Bahagavad Gita which everyone should read.

I have been writing on this subject for the past four months or so in various threads in the Buddhism forum. I am always stating the same simple truth.

I just saw this post: yes, arjunadawn is a reference to just that, the battle of Kerkeshetra in the Mahabarata. How awesome, to have Krishna declare to you you may have all My armies, but then my counsel I give to your enemies. Or you may have my counsel, but then my armies too will be arrayed against you. Wisely, Arjuna choose counsel. Indeed, this great battle is the most brilliant metaphor for the battles we are currently describing- the flesh and attachment. Pharamahansa Yogananda wrote a brilliant exposition on the point of this battle being a metaphor for our own struggles with maya.

[beautifulthailand99]

I don't know if this guy matches up to some of your theological deepness but what he says resonates with me - briefly put nibbana is here , now.

[arjunadawn]

I don't know if this guy matches up to some of your theological deepness but what he says resonates with me - briefly put nibbana is here , now.

Thank you for sharing this. I thought the speaker was eloquent, insightful, and also correct. But what is correct is often both relative and absolute; thus the enduring paradoxes of so many who travel the path. Yet the truth is always found in both- the relative and the absolute. The speaker makes a distinction between nirvana and bodhisattva yet I don't think it's accurate insofar as it is never either or, for one who attains this. One can possess a state of nirvana "right here, right now" and still attain further advanced state where they become a bodhisattva.

The assertion that nirvana is "right here, right now" (Quote: The Journey of a Modern Mystic: The Battle for The Kingdom of God) is not unique to this speaker. It's asserted by no less than the Christ himself, in his own choice of words, that "The Kingdom of God is at hand." Again, the constant paradoxes of the relative and the absolute would have some relatively receiving The Christ's assertion that something is arriving shortly and one further along the path absolutely realizing The Christ was stating a fact- nirvana is not a state to be concealed, occasionally revealing, retreating, coy, in the future tense, and decidedly difficult to attain. Nirvana is a "choice," to see "the kingdom of god," "right here, right now!" The difference in word choices is meaningless for someone attuned to really noting what is being said. Haven't we all noticed the further we mature in our spirituality the greater our apprehension and understanding of subtleties?

I am not convinced that those who attain nirvana or slip in and out of this "state" no longer suffer. I hold they simply have ineffable context in which to place the awareness of suffering in, and thus they may relatively be free of suffering, and remain in the world. Can one like this feel pain? A broken bone? An injured child before them? Yes, I believe attaining nirvana does not free one from pain, only enables the context to process it. The body still functions, fails, and is subject to decay, and the tendency toward great compassion makes some pain even more exquisite. Yet they remain aloof, finally and always. This too is relative and absolute. Lastly, when one such as this decides or elects, if you will, to become a bodhisattva (assuming that is the mechanism) it is their deepened capacity for awareness and sensitivity that motivates them. I hold that when one can further extend their apprehension they further extend their accountability. Who best to bear the pain of the world than one who actually comprehends it?

(I recall an analogy from Light on The Path, M. Collins, that describes life in such a manner: like school children ascending a spiral staircase we each evolve our spirit but often we may note how the 6th grader looks back smugly, and with great pride, at the 1st and 2nd graders on the stairs below him, never realizing that further above him college students continue into the clouds (paraphrase). Could that 4th grader really accept responsibility for that which he cannot conceive and aid others? The 1st grader? No! And so it is a person who attains a height where in love they look back at the others and realize they have work to do- bodhisattva).

[trd]

I don't know if this guy matches up to some of your theological deepness but what he says resonates with me - briefly put nibbana is here , now.

If that message resonates with you, examine why this is so. You can choose to treat this feeling as a passing interest as most do and quickly move on to the next feeling or you can really investigate what it is within you that resonates. Everyone has a sense of identity. But for most people it is mixed. The feeling of identity is made up of both the unchanging absolute and the ever changing relative. This mix leads to confusion precisely because nibbana is here now, because identification with mind and body causes you to pull away from being totally present in the moment to identify with and attach to a temporal and causative existence that has no substantial reality. This veil between what is real and not real is ignorance. The lifting of the veil reveals what has always been there.

You don't have to do anything. You just have to remove that which causes the unreal to appear and that is to eliminate the mind.

[arjunadawn]

I don't know if this guy matches up to some of your theological deepness but what he says resonates with me - briefly put nibbana is here , now.

If that message resonates with you, examine why this is so. You can choose to treat this feeling as a passing interest as most do and quickly move on to the next feeling or you can really investigate what it is within you that resonates. Everyone has a sense of identity. But for most people it is mixed. The feeling of identity is made up of both the unchanging absolute and the ever changing relative. This mix leads to confusion precisely because nibbana is here now, because identification with mind and body causes you to pull away from being totally present in the moment to identify with and attach to a temporal and causative existence that has no substantial reality. This veil between what is real and not real is ignorance. The lifting of the veil reveals what has always been there.

You don't have to do anything. You just have to remove that which causes the unreal to appear and that is to eliminate the mind.

The speakers message does resonate with me, a bit. I have had the fortune in this life to have a veil that is thinner than it is for most. However, It has caused great stress and grief in early years as the highs were high and the lows so low- I later learned this is termed the "Dark Night of the Soul" (E. Underhill) and is quite common for many. As I've aged I have constructed my life around seeking clarity; and now just stillness. It's just been my choice and while I have looked into numerous "paths" toward the "prize" I have found the most obvious path is the self evident one that reveals itself to my stilled mind. What I find so curious today is after so many years of mentally traveling through various texts (though I've never belonged to any) I find here, in this forum, some really, really bright folks. Actually, the stuff I have been reading here has occupied a considerable portion of my mental week! Thank you, all.

I am not a Buddhist, per se, and identify with no religion. However, the closest thing I have found in my interior travels is contained in Buddhism. I think I need an entire revisit of Buddhism, from the ground floor up.

[trd]

Although Buddhism may present a methodology, to be established in stillness is beyond Buddhism or any other religion or philosophy. I try to avoid labels but if pushed I would refer to myself as an Advaita Vedantin, not a Buddhist.

Ultimately there is no teacher or teachings, just the recognition of being as your are. The sole purpose of a guru is just to continually remind you of this until the illusion falls away.

[rockyysdt]

Everyone has a sense of identity. But for most people it is mixed. The feeling of identity is made up of both the unchanging absolute and the ever changing relative. This mix leads to confusion precisely because nibbana is here now, because identification with mind and body causes you to pull away from being totally present in the moment to identify with and attach to a temporal and causative existence that has no substantial reality. This veil between what is real and not real is ignorance. The lifting of the veil reveals what has always been there.

You don't have to do anything. You just have to remove that which causes the unreal to appear and that is to eliminate the mind. Ultimately there is no teacher or teachings, just the recognition of being as you are. The sole purpose of a guru is just to continually remind you of this until the illusion falls away.

Hi TRD.

We have discussed this matter several times and in different ways but for some reason I continue not to understand.

Other than identifying with the unchanging absolute, as well as our weakness of identifying with the changing relative, "without body & mind, who are we really, or who really are we?"

From what I've gathered to date it sounds like we are a soul which consists of pure awareness but which is in a state lacking awareness.

Edited June 21, 2014 by rockyysdt

[arjunadawn]

Although Buddhism may present a methodology, to be established in stillness is beyond Buddhism or any other religion or philosophy. I try to avoid labels but if pushed I would refer to myself as an Advaita Vedantin, not a Buddhist.

Ultimately there is no teacher or teachings, just the recognition of being as your are. The sole purpose of a guru is just to continually remind you of this until the illusion falls away.

Agreed! This would explain why I've "locked in" on your comments. They reflect the Vedanta, which underlies much of my understanding.

I'd previously noted elsewhere that a real teacher never actually bears the light, he only reflects it. It is our own capacity to love and transcend that is reflected in an able teacher.

[trd]

Everyone has a sense of identity. But for most people it is mixed. The feeling of identity is made up of both the unchanging absolute and the ever changing relative. This mix leads to confusion precisely because nibbana is here now, because identification with mind and body causes you to pull away from being totally present in the moment to identify with and attach to a temporal and causative existence that has no substantial reality. This veil between what is real and not real is ignorance. The lifting of the veil reveals what has always been there.

You don't have to do anything. You just have to remove that which causes the unreal to appear and that is to eliminate the mind. Ultimately there is no teacher or teachings, just the recognition of being as you are. The sole purpose of a guru is just to continually remind you of this until the illusion falls away.

Hi TRD.

We have discussed this matter several times and in different ways but for some reason I continue not to understand.

Other than identifying with the unchanging absolute, as well as our weakness of identifying with the changing relative, "without body & mind, who are we really, or who really are we?"

From what I've gathered to date it sounds like we are a soul which consists of pure awareness but which is in a state lacking awareness.

You cannot identify with the absolute. Identification is a mental process and requires a mind as the knower, or subject, and an object to be known. The absolute is non dual, without form, so any attempt to identify with it would be conceptual. The only way of knowing what is at the centre of an onion is to peel away each layer. When everything is removed, only empty space remains.

The absolute cannot be known directly. The mind cannot take you there. The mind cannot go back prior to mind. It is the removal of ignorance which reveals the light. From what you have said in the past, and in a very eloquent way, it seems that your meditation practice of turning the attention back to awareness is doing just that. So why do you continue to need words as validation of your experience.

I'm conscious of trying to straddle both traditions, but as you are a practising Buddhist you will know that like the onion, the mind and body which appears to make you an individual along with all changing phenomena is anatta. Buddha avoided any metaphysical notions of a larger or universal Self as appears in the Vedic tradition and advised followers to only attend to the noble truths. In Vedanta there is the principle of "neti neti" (not this not this) to demonstrate that no idea or object can be the reality.

But whatever camp you are in, it makes no sense to say that "we are a soul which consists of pure awareness but which is in a state lacking awareness." As a Vedantin I would say there is only Self as the ultimate reality, which is the same as the absolute. A soul suggests a limited individuality which is impermanent and therefore unreal. Vedanta does refer to a soul (jiva) but it is perishable unlike the Christian version which is immortal. You see how you can spend a lifetime grappling with all these various belief systems and not get anywhere. You are left frustrated.

As to the second point, how can you have pure awareness that is lacking awareness?

What is causing the confusion is that you are imagining or projecting in your mind some kind of idealised state of pure awareness, but that imagining is tainted by the impurity of the mind that is imagining it, so you attribute to it a lack of awareness, which itself is an imagining, to explain why you are not experiencing it totally. This is self defeating, which is why you must put your trust in practice and the testimony of masters. In your case, has scripture not fulfilled its purpose? Has your practice not set you on the road of direct experience? In one of the Upanishads it says that scripture is as useful as a reservoir in a flood. If, as you have said, you are connecting with that silence within, albeit in a momentary way, then that essential discrimination is developing which reveals being as separate from phenomena and the illusion of individual self. Continue on that path and all doubts will be dispelled.

[trd]

As I've aged I have constructed my life around seeking clarity; and now just stillness. It's just been my choice and while I have looked into numerous "paths" toward the "prize" I have found the most obvious path is the self evident one that reveals itself to my stilled mind.

This is a most profound insight. Stay with this. Stillness is clarity.

You are becoming quiet with intent as an apparent doer of action. But it is grace that finally invites you across the threshold as the non doer of action.