The problem with all religions

[RandomSand]

This is a Buddhist forum is it not? I presume you are here to discuss the teachings. What I am saying is perfectly consistent with those and other teachings from the Vedic tradition.

You're saying mind is the true self.

no self = doctrine of Buddhism

The world of objects is impermanent

Yes this is exactly why I asked VincentRJ about a central point of rotation in the universe. Such a point would be permanent. Of course, you think that all matter depends on a permanent mind. Yet that self cannot be found. It's a faulty view. You might say "mind is impermanent" however you also say "All of this changing phenomena is perceived by mind alone". So you obviously believe in the doctrine of mind as the true self. This is gross misinterpretation of Buddhism which is now rampant. The teaching is "mind is false and no self really exists". The teaching is not "the body is false and mind really exists". Yes, of course, there are other teachings such as all form is unborn and like a dream but this is something separate and does not mean "all is mind" or "mind is aware".

It is only silence which reveals your true nature

You might say that but consider this; a parent looks at their child and sees their child's true nature non-stop, as plain as day, and nothing needs to be "revealed" by meditation.

Edited November 9, 2014 by RandomSand

[trd]

I do not say anywhere nor have I ever said I believe in the doctrine of mind as the True Self. Read my words.

[trd]

If you think a parent looking at her child sees its true nature then you have not understood me. I would recommend you take a look at what is believed to be Buddha's final teaching, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra.

[trd]

Or, if you are really having trouble accepting me as an authority on these matters, I would suggest you listen to someone like Ajahn Chah whose main message is about letting go, which is another way of telling you to surrender to that which transcends mind.

[trd]

I'm sorry RandomSand, I'm finding it difficult to follow your reasoning or understand your questions. Perhaps you can tell me what you think the heck this mind is because nothing you say is clear to me.

What's actually real;

A "mind" which can't be found,

or the earth beneath your feet ?

And what is it that perceives the earth beneath your feet?

[trd]

The teaching is "mind is false and no self really exists".

It appears we agree on something. Edited November 9, 2014 by trd

[VincentRJ]

I'd like to ask you, VincentRJ; Do you think the universe is performing a rotation around a central axis ?

How could I possibly know, RandomSand. I'm not an astrophysicist, but I'm led to believe that certain distant galaxies are rotating faster than they should be, according to current conceptual theories that exist only in the mind. Such observed phenomena has caused great speculation about the existence of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

Sooner or later, I suspect that scientist will either discover, observe or capture particles of Dark Matter, thus confirming the reality of its existence, or they will modify their existing theories to provide an alternative explanation for the faster-than-expected rotation of the distant galaxies. However, in order to achieve a satisfactory, alternative explanation, perhaps they will have to wait for another Albert Einstein to appear on the scene. (Or perhaps a Trd. Sorry! Couldn't resist. )

As for "mind exists because it can be tricked";..Mind only exists like the shadows cast by real objects. Although shadows appear to exist, apparent existence of shadows is a trick.A camera can capture an image of these shadows. Does the camera have a mind? Is the camera tricked? --No.

Shadows are not tricks. They are perfectly natural and understandable phenomena. I can't recall a single incidence when I might have confused a shadow with the object or person associated with the shadow.

A camera is a product from the mind, an imperfect device created to simulate or represent the scenes of reality that we imagine we see. The camera cannot be tricked because it's an inanimate object. Trickery applies only to living creatures with a mind and a brain.

However, the camera can produce results which are misleading because it's an imperfect device that doesn't behave like a real eye and human brain.

Still you say the trick has been performed. That the mind has been tricked. Consider this: how can the "trick itself" be tricked ?

That was one of my points. If one agrees that the mind can be tricked, then one must logically agree that the mind must exist, in order for it to be tricked.

[trd]

The teaching is "mind is false and no self really exists".

If that is what you believe RandomSand, why is this? Why do you believe it. Where is the proof. Most of what you say is to question what I have said and to attribute words and meanings to my text that just isn't there. So what do you think. Let us have the benefit of your knowledge and understanding in simple terms that I can understand.

[RandomSand]

Still you say the trick has been performed. That the mind has been tricked. Consider this: how can the "trick itself" be tricked ?

That was one of my points. If one agrees that the mind can be tricked, then one must logically agree that the mind must exist, in order for it to be tricked.

Take a rope, tie it into a knot, compare it with a brain, and a mind.

We don't say "there must be a knot otherwise we couldn't have a rope".

There aren't two things. There's only one. A rope, via-a-vis, A brain.

You must admit, if your supposed "mind" is cognizing without your body, it's a pretty big coincidence you even have a brain.

So what do you think. Let us have the benefit of your knowledge and understanding in simple terms that I can understand

As long as you sit there thinking you know it all, trd, you're stagnant and not learning. You've pressed pause, exclaiming "This is the unchanging truth", yet the whole universe is in motion.

Edited November 9, 2014 by RandomSand

[RandomSand]

Where is the proof.

When doctors wish to monitor a patient to know if they're dead or alive, they don't monitor the "mind activity"; they monitor the heart beating.

Alas, perhaps it's too simple for you understand, you've already out-foxed yourself with the riddle that a true-self actually exists apart from your material body.

Like a famous guru said: "I am that".

Take note; he didn't say "I'm not that".

imho; When he used the word "i" he meant the infinite true reality which is right before your eyes.

Of course, he was saying the ego is false, like a shadow, and not "I am that mind" or "I am this ego".

Whilst today it's well known that we're made from the same matter as the most distant stars someone saying that 2000yrs ago was quite novel.

Of course there might be another (transcendental) perspective, of time & space, but that doesn't mean that your current perspective is false.

If it is (false) then it's a crying shame that you seem to be having this false experience all the time and you can't switch it off!

If you ignore what a five year old knows is true then I think you've become confused about what is real and unreal.

Edited November 9, 2014 by RandomSand

[trd]

So what do you think. Let us have the benefit of your knowledge and understanding in simple terms that I can understand

As long as you sit there thinking you know it all, trd, you're stagnant and not learning. You've pressed pause, exclaiming "This is the unchanging truth", yet the whole universe is in motion.

Well, I'm still waiting for your answer.

What is it exactly that you think I know and what is it that you think should be learned and who is this apparent person who does the learning? You are correct. The whole universe is in motion. And where does this person you call you without a mind fit in to this universe in motion as you type your posts on your computer.

[trd]

Alas, perhaps it's too simple for you understand, you've already out-foxed yourself with the riddle that a true-self actually exists apart from your material body.

To say the true self exists apart from the body is like saying the ocean exists apart from the wave. The ocean is without form, but gives expression to the wave which is dependent on ocean. This is dependent arising. True self is both apart from body and world and also includes body and world. True Self is one without a second. It is infinite.

Like a famous guru said: "I am that".

Take note; he didn't say "I'm not that".

imho; When he used the word "i" he meant the infinite true reality which is right before your eyes.

Nisargadatta Maharaj said that. Have you read his books, "I am That" and "Prior to Consciousness". He also said I am not this which in sanskrit is "neti neti" (not this not this) a phIlosophical argument in vedanta to show that if you choose objects or the body you will continue to say, I am not this, my hand, I am not this, my arm etc etc. and then my mind, neti, neti. I am not even my mind.

Of course, he was saying the ego is false, like a shadow, and not "I am that mind" or "I am this ego".

Yes, the mind is false, the ego is false. It is just an appearance. Have I not being saying that all along?

[RandomSand]

So now;

There is matter, which looks pretty real to me.

There is mind, which is false.

And there's also a true-self ?

The holy trinity or just a familiar dualism, trd ?

Edited November 9, 2014 by RandomSand

[trd]

So now;

There is matter, which looks pretty real to me.

There is mind, which is false.

And there's also a true-self ?

The holy trinity or just a familiar dualism, trd ?

Tell me what YOU think.

[RandomSand]

My philosophy is barely worth mentioning.

I sit here typing this yet i is a figure of speech.

There's nothing to be told which isn't obvious to a dog.

[VincentRJ]

Still you say the trick has been performed. That the mind has been tricked. Consider this: how can the "trick itself" be tricked ?

That was one of my points. If one agrees that the mind can be tricked, then one must logically agree that the mind must exist, in order for it to be tricked.

Take a rope, tie it into a knot, compare it with a brain, and a mind.

We don't say "there must be a knot otherwise we couldn't have a rope".

There aren't two things. There's only one. A rope, via-a-vis, A brain.

You must admit, if your supposed "mind" is cognizing without your body, it's a pretty big coincidence you even have a brain.

I'm getting a sense of confused logic from your above statements, RandomSand.

The mind is dependent on the brain. No brain, no mind. The brain comes first just as the rope comes first, before the knot can be created. The knot cannot exist without the rope. The rope can exist without the knot.The mind cannot exist without the brain. However, a brain can malfunction, or be drugged, or one can simply be asleep, so that there is no mind, temporarily, in the sense of no conscious awareness, and one can still be alive.

The mind is a manifestation of some very complex activities in the brain. The mind is far too complex for anyone to claim it is 'this' or 'that'. However, for the purpose of practising meditation in order to still the mind, I imagine it would be helpful to consider the mind as an illusion and all those nuisance thoughts illusory.

[trd]

The mind is a manifestation of some very complex activities in the brain. The mind is far too complex for anyone to claim it is 'this' or 'that'. However, for the purpose of practising meditation in order to still the mind, I imagine it would be helpful to consider the mind as an illusion and all those nuisance thoughts illusory.

That is a very wise statement!

[RandomSand]

imho;

If you're a normal person then you're most happy when busy and active.

Tunnelling into a illusory neurotic mind-scape is often an unhealthy activity.

Further; religions are liable to lead us into performing unnecessary and contrived mental activity.

"Am I meditating correctly?", "Am I thinking good thoughts?", are all neurotic questions that are unhealthy and contrived.

So there's no need to worry about thinking.

When you simply get on with things, live your life, I think you'll find that you're mostly feeling your way around the world...

You can touch, taste, see, hear, smell, etc, and you feel.

This emotive feeling is hard to quantify yet forms the basis of what is meant by being alive.

Edited November 9, 2014 by RandomSand

[RandomSand]

...samsara will come back with full-force when none of these remedies are there anymore.

If "activity" is a remedy then it could be aligned, juxtaposed in harmony, with the constant motion of the universe.

...and non-activity, stillness, cessation, could be aligned with death.

____________________

"You Get What You Give"

Edited November 10, 2014 by RandomSand

[RandomSand]

...samsara will come back with full-force when none of these remedies are there anymore.

We could experience this apparently venomous feedback if we not in harmony with the world around us. Friction, Vexation, Dissonance, are all terms to describe this non-concordance between who you believe you are and what you believe the world around you actually is.

I get the impression you're an army-of-1, against the whole world, by the way you frame your world view. How can you ever win against this infinitely powerful and inventive force? Next year ....perhaps.

If you regard this world as a living hell; then perhaps you'll become a demon. If you regard this world as selfless; then perhaps you'll become a selfless person. If you regard this world as attacking you; then perhaps you'll attack the world.

Of course I'm making a scape goat out of your statement for the possible benefit other readers. I hope you don't mind. I hope you don't feel vengeance. This is no way to live.

Edited November 10, 2014 by RandomSand

[VincentRJ]

The mind is a manifestation of some very complex activities in the brain. The mind is far too complex for anyone to claim it is 'this' or 'that'. However, for the purpose of practising meditation in order to still the mind, I imagine it would be helpful to consider the mind as an illusion and all those nuisance thoughts illusory.

That is a very wise statement!

That's very magnanimous of you to say so, Trd.

[MilesofSmiles]

So now;

There is matter, which looks pretty real to me.

There is mind, which is false.

And there's also a true-self ?

The holy trinity or just a familiar dualism, trd ?

Tell me what YOU think.

OK.

The universe is all one giant ocean of consciousness(es).

Each individual consciousness is god having different dreams. (

Souls are unique dreams with free will and memories.

It's multi-dimensional.

And we move between them on the soul's journey of learning and growing.

Different life forms in different dimensions.

My take on the trinity.

God the, everything that is, I am, is, and we are.

The holy spirit is the ocean analogy I use. Our souls are connected to god by the holy spirit no matter which dimension, or incarnation we're currently in.

The Son, is a metaphor for god taking a local form "on the ground", of wherever we are, that makes sense.

God's "man on the ground", as it were.

Things are also ... fractal for lack of a better word, maybe.

Not until my late 20's did I have a truly spiritually moving and perspective-changing experience.

As though god pulled me out of the body to see behind the curtains of reality.

The feeling of contentedness to the entire universe, as well as being part of it, made of the same stuff.

Wow.

[RandomSand]

So now;

There is matter, which looks pretty real to me.

There is mind, which is false.

And there's also a true-self ?

The holy trinity or just a familiar dualism, trd ?

Tell me what YOU think.

OK.

The universe is all one giant ocean of consciousness(es).

Each individual consciousness is god having different dreams. (

Souls are unique dreams with free will and memories.

It's multi-dimensional.

And we move between them on the soul's journey of learning and growing.

Different life forms in different dimensions.

My take on the trinity.

God the, everything that is, I am, is, and we are.

The holy spirit is the ocean analogy I use. Our souls are connected to god by the holy spirit no matter which dimension, or incarnation we're currently in.

The Son, is a metaphor for god taking a local form "on the ground", of wherever we are, that makes sense.

God's "man on the ground", as it were.

Things are also ... fractal for lack of a better word, maybe.

Not until my late 20's did I have a truly spiritually moving and perspective-changing experience.

As though god pulled me out of the body to see behind the curtains of reality.

The feeling of contentedness to the entire universe, as well as being part of it, made of the same stuff.

Wow.

Your interpretation, whilst interesting, differs from an unbiased factual account of the experience.

It's like asking an author "How did you write your book" and he says "with the aid of toasted cheese sandwiches, espresso coffee and my two cats".

Whilst he thinks something like that, the truth is he wrote his book using a typewriter whilst sat at a desk.

Edited November 10, 2014 by RandomSand