At the end of the day, How do we know that any of it is true (Awakening - Nibbana)?

[rockyysdt]

Humans maybe finite. Is our mind, spirit , soul finite , too ?

As part of the infinite, we may also comprehend it, can´t we ?

In Buddhism there is no soul or spirit.

In Buddhism the mind (thought/memory/feeling ) is impermanent and conditioned.

How can the finite comprehend the infinite?

In terms of infinite let me relate this to nibbana.

Formless.

Timeless.

Unborn therefore deathless.

Pure awareness.

Can you comprehend it?

Edited December 29, 2014 by rockyysdt

[CapeCobra]

Humans maybe finite. Is our mind, spirit , soul finite , too ?

As part of the infinite, we may also comprehend it, can´t we ?

In Buddhism there is no soul or spirit.

In Buddhism the mind (thought/memory/feeling ) is impermanent and conditioned.

How can the finite comprehend the infinite?

In terms of infinite let me relate this to nibbana.

Formless.

Timeless.

Unborn therefore deathless.

Pure awareness.

Can you comprehend it?

Mind produced matter in a devolutionary way. After experiencing matter, we return to pure mind. Formless, timeless, deathless, for me, are nonlocal properties. Consciousness remains in quantum nonlocality. It is not confined to our brain.

[Sparkling]

Humans maybe finite. Is our mind, spirit , soul finite , too ?

As part of the infinite, we may also comprehend it, can´t we ?

In Buddhism there is no soul or spirit.

In Buddhism the mind (thought/memory/feeling ) is impermanent and conditioned.

How can the finite comprehend the infinite?

In terms of infinite let me relate this to nibbana.

Formless.

Timeless.

Unborn therefore deathless.

Pure awareness.

Can you comprehend it?

Mind produced matter in a devolutionary way. After experiencing matter, we return to pure mind. Formless, timeless, deathless, for me, are nonlocal properties. Consciousness remains in quantum nonlocality. It is not confined to our brain.

CapeCobra pretty nice

All the Formless,Timeless, Unborn, Pure awareness are in the first place only names, words.

Same with Soul, Spirit, Mind.

Words are manmade communication symbols. Any culture has its own (btw a joy of variety to have)

Yet manmade they are limited. the being itself is not identic with the word.

As the bible says: Names are smoke and sound. Come and go.

If there is no souls,spirit , what is it, that is reborn ?

Allow me to refer back to what was written: Very suspicious about an abstract authority beyond comprehension

AND the logic: the infinite must logically include us.

There is even a christian attitude that god created humans to be actually comprehended by them.

ah it was jewish in the first place....

Obviously it is not easy for the finite human mind to imagine or comprehend the infinite.

The fault may be to try. Especially with the rational mind as science does.

However they try hard with very good ideas , which sometimes come close and may help.

As long you try, there is desire, something you want to achieve (that´s basically ok),

therefore selfish and vain. At least to suceed, we need infinite selfishness and vanity ;-)

If we really let go, the infinite (who of course got the power - probably infinite power)

may come to our mind.

The nonlocal conciousness (thanX CC) also includes our minds (see above: we are part of infinity).

We just may take part of it.

Now we may see that the logic of words goes in circles. Maybe because the human made word system is limited.

Maybe because this is a way of infinity.

That could be the reason for: One who knows doesn´t speak. The one who speaks doesn´t know.

Due to language barriers nonverbal communication is a often experience for me in Thailand.

You may know a lot by just looking at each other, when you are connected in a warmhearted way.

Even with strangers.

It is also quite common, when you are in love (even if it is for a certain time only).

Poetry and art, music goes beyond verbal communication despite they still use words as well.

It is an energy, but still beyond that. Because remember: Energy is only a word.

Easy to sse that we get to a point , when we have to stop speaking.

A little advice for the next step: As long as you feel separated fron the infinite, how may it come to you ?

Meditation is a strategy to let go. It works. Is it the only way ? Which meditation is right or true meditation ?

Meditation is a word.

Seek silence ? What is silence ?

I had silence in crowded third class busses.

Open up to the beauty around. Get in touch. Hug and smile. Small and simple things mostly do the best.

[beautifulthailand99]

Whaterever the truth or not I find peace in doig good and enjoying the ride. I enjoy long conversations with the Abbott of my local UK Thai Wat but have said I enjoy the world too much to want to spend too much time in the temple. We seem to connect and rereats at Amaravati help to reset my batteries. I find Buddhism the only path that seems to make sense but don't want to be be dragged into wat politics and burearacy. The Abbott said it is enough that the Thai community nourishes the priesthood and promulagtes tha Dhamma down the ages - how far you want to get into it is up to you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMUiwTubYu0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9fs5BpsY6A

Edited December 29, 2014 by beautifulthailand99

[RandomSand]

On the subject of Reincarnation - can can someone who believes in this explain how approx 150 years ago the human population was 1 billion whereas today its some 7 billion.

If 1 billion souls were reincarnated over this period where did the other 6 billion come from ?

Perhaps we should start a million years ago when the human population was only in the thousands.

The illusion of the Mind trickes us into thinking it is more then just a manifestation of the Brain. This allows us to forget that we are just another hairy Ape that came down from the trees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_spiritual_realms

The ten spiritual realms are part of the belief of some forms of Buddhism that there are ten conditions of life which sentient beings are subject to, and which they experience from moment to moment.

The ten spiritual realms are part of Buddhist cosmology and consist of four higher realms and six lower realms. Some schools of Buddhism see them as being external, ten different planes of existence beings can be born into, whilst others see them as states of mind that can be shifted between due to external and internal influences.

Edited December 30, 2014 by RandomSand

[RandomSand]

(Ven Maha Boowa)

All living beings must fall into one of these four categories. As I investigated the nature of the world, it separated naturally, of its own accord, into these four types of individuals. I could see that superior individuals existed in that multitude of humanity which I had felt so discouraged about teaching. Ugghaåitaññý: they were fully prepared to cross beyond in an instant. In descending order: there were vipacitaññý, those progressing quickly toward the goal; then, the neyya, whose desire to lie down and take it easy competes with their desire to be diligent. Do you see what I mean? Those two opposing forces are vying for supremacy within their hearts. And finally padaparama: those who are human in physical appearance only. They have gained nothing at all to enhance their future prospects. Death for such people is death without distinction. There is only one possible direction they can go—down. And they fall further and further with each successive death. The way up is blocked, for they have gained absolutely nothing beneficial to take along with them. They can only go down. Remember this well! This teaching comes straight from my heart. Do you think I am bluffing and telling you deliberate falsehoods? When compared with a heart that’s absolutely pure, the world is one big refuse bin, containing different grades of garbage. From the highest, ugghaåitaññý, to the lowest and most common grade, padaparama, all possible types are gathered together in the same great receptacle. The entire world of conventional reality is one big contaminated mix of good things and bad things. Do you understand? In my investigation, I sifted through this huge pile of garbage and uncovered four distinct grades of living beings.

He strongly implies there's a dualism in our hearts:

two opposing forces are vying for supremacy within their hearts

He then implies that his own heart is absolutely pure and I personally take this to mean "empty", i.e absent the previously mentioned dualism, rather than "altruistic" :

When compared with a heart that’s absolutely pure ...

from this - presumingly enlightened - viewpoint; he then exposes our own ignorance:

... the world is one big refuse bin, containing different grades of garbage... four distinct grades of living beings

Edited December 30, 2014 by RandomSand

[VincentRJ]

How do we know any of it (Nibbana - end of Dukkha) is true? Some have practiced for decades without fruit.

The major problem with discussions like this is the lack of precise and meaningful definitions of the words we use. The reason why science is so successful is because we precisely define every key word that is used to describe every process. Without precise definitions that are valid for every individual, confusion reigns, as in this thread.

The concepts of a soul, a free spirit, Nirvana, reincarnation, etc, are metaphorical terms (in my very humble opinion), more suitable for poetry, fanciful wishing, daydreaming and flights of the imagination.

However, exercising one's imagination is to be encouraged. Writers of novels and fiction rely upon it, but hopefully such writers know they are writing fiction, although that's not always the case.

The nature of religion seems to be that certain individuals somehow get a strong and insurmountable emotional experience that something is true, an experience so powerful that it changes their behaviour and motivation.

How can such emotions be accurately described in common language? How would it be possible to describe what a sexual orgasm is to someone who has never experienced a sexual orgasm? I don't wish to appear crude, but I imagine that someone who has experienced Nirvana would have a similar problem in explaining what it is to those who haven't experienced it.

[trd]

All definitions are and always will be imprecise. Anything you add to yourself is getting further away from yourself. Discard all definitions. Discard all religious scripture. Kill the Buddha.

[RandomSand]

All definitions are and always will be imprecise. Anything you add to yourself is getting further away from yourself. Discard all definitions. Discard all religious scripture. Kill the Buddha.

How would it be possible to kill "the" Buddha when said Buddha is already liberated from the cycle of birth and death ?

Edited December 30, 2014 by RandomSand

[manarak]

At the end of the day, everyone's experience is subjective, isn't it? Cognitive Therapy as pioneered by Burns at the University of Pennsylvania attempts to have suffering people change their interpretation of events, hence their thoughts, to relieve their unhappiness. I see this as being in consonance with Buddhist practice just different in its specific objectives. I ventured the opinion before that nibbana could be subjectively experienced by taking many approaches but I guess that this is getting close to blasphemy in the opinion of Buddhist practitioners and my post was removed. I hope that it won't be this time. My Buddhist monk friends don't find my views to be outrageous, but I guess that they are quite liberal in their thinking.

Hi Dog.

My questions still hold but you have an interesting viewpoint.

My understanding is that the aim is to establish a deep level of Samahdi in which one pointed concentration results in a state beyond thought.

As the state is beyond thought, it has nothing to do with interpretation of thought or memory.

The instruction is that contemplation shouldn't occur until practice allows one to easily enter and maintain deep level of Samahdi (a conscious state absent of thought) for long periods.

Those who contemplate during simple relaxation states, have their conclusions tainted by thought, memory & belief (conditioning) as well as external influences such as cognitive therapy.

Whilst on this reasoning, many Buddhists, immersed in doctrine without practice are in danger of replacing one set of beliefs with another, rather than discovering what actually is via practice.

you cannot know it, but you can believe it.

[DaffyDuck]

None of it is true. Anything based uniquely on subjective experiences is not true.

[trd]

All definitions are and always will be imprecise. Anything you add to yourself is getting further away from yourself. Discard all definitions. Discard all religious scripture. Kill the Buddha.

How would it be possible to kill "the" Buddha when said Buddha is already liberated from the cycle of birth and death ?

The man called Buddha died 2,500 years ago. If he merged with the infinite he is no longer the man called Buddha.

[trd]

None of it is true. Anything based uniquely on subjective experiences is not true.

There is only the subjective. It is not possible to have an objective experience because the object is perceived by the subject without which there can be no experience. All experience is subjective. What is true is to be the subject alone. Edited December 31, 2014 by trd

[DaffyDuck]

Wrong.

[DaffyDuck]

Objective verification and, to a similar degree, shared experiences are verification of an objective experience.

It's called 'science' - which I understand is a foreign concept to the believers in 'woo'.

[VincentRJ]

Objective verification and, to a similar degree, shared experiences are verification of an objective experience.

It's called 'science' - which I understand is a foreign concept to the believers in 'woo'.

Take the simple, shared experience that a particular leaf is green in color. Is that an objective experience? I would suggest that the experience of color exists only in the mind, and that experience is different to some degree for all individuals who view the leaf, particularly for those who do not have normal vision, who may be color blind, and particularly for other creatures on the planet whose visual system is different to ours.

What science can do is associate the normal, shared experience of the color green with a particular, narrow range of electromagnetic frequencies which the leaf is able to reflect. If such frequencies of light are not present, or are present to different degrees in the general mix of light frequencies, as in the light from a sunset, the leaf will appear to change color. Yet the leaf hasn't changed color objectively because the leaf doesn't have a color. It's color is only a subjective property of our mind.

[Nayet]

Humans maybe finite. Is our mind, spirit , soul finite , too ?

As part of the infinite, we may also comprehend it, can´t we ?

In Buddhism there is no soul or spirit.

In Buddhism the mind (thought/memory/feeling ) is impermanent and conditioned.

How can the finite comprehend the infinite?

In terms of infinite let me relate this to nibbana.

Formless.

Timeless.

Unborn therefore deathless.

Pure awareness.

Can you comprehend it?

Mind produced matter in a devolutionary way. After experiencing matter, we return to pure mind. Formless, timeless, deathless, for me, are nonlocal properties. Consciousness remains in quantum nonlocality. It is not confined to our brain.

And how do you know this?

[RandomSand]

All definitions are and always will be imprecise. Anything you add to yourself is getting further away from yourself. Discard all definitions. Discard all religious scripture. Kill the Buddha.

How would it be possible to kill "the" Buddha when said Buddha is already liberated from the cycle of birth and death ?

The man called Buddha died 2,500 years ago. If he merged with the infinite he is no longer the man called Buddha.

Died?

He was already liberated from the cycle of birth and death

Edited December 31, 2014 by RandomSand

[CapeCobra]

Humans maybe finite. Is our mind, spirit , soul finite , too ?

As part of the infinite, we may also comprehend it, can´t we ?

In Buddhism there is no soul or spirit.

In Buddhism the mind (thought/memory/feeling ) is impermanent and conditioned.

How can the finite comprehend the infinite?

In terms of infinite let me relate this to nibbana.

Formless.

Timeless.

Unborn therefore deathless.

Pure awareness.

Can you comprehend it?

Mind produced matter in a devolutionary way. After experiencing matter, we return to pure mind. Formless, timeless, deathless, for me, are nonlocal properties. Consciousness remains in quantum nonlocality. It is not confined to our brain.

And how do you know this?

I don't. It's a theory that makes sense to me. It explains experiences I had. It is my subjective synthesis after studying the works by renowned authors in many fields: Quantum Mechanics, Relativistic Mechanics, Quantum Field Theory, Astrophysics, Neuroscience, Biophysics, Cognitive Sciences, Philosophy, Archeology, Peer Reviewed Medical Studies, Artificial Intelligence and others. My professional background is in computer science.

Sometimes, unbelievable stories make sense to me. Example http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12301-man-with-tiny-brain-shocks-doctors.html#.VKN0718YYuo

[Diddl]

If all these explanations are “subjective property of the mind”, then all these books and orally teachings are nothing but money-making activities. Are we all being deceived yet again? I have had some experiences that relate to various teachings, so now I wonder whether my mind created it all and nothing is really true or real. Has my mind imagined it all? Has the mind deceived all these so-called holy men?

Has anyone ever truly met an enlightened person? I haven’t!

Another question – why is there always a hierarchy in all religions? If we are supposedly all one, why the difference? As far as I am concerned, this is all man-made to boost the ego to those in so-called knowledge and to lower those in so-called ignorance. Mankind is indeed the biggest deceiver of himself and likes to worship a father-figure!

Belief, belief, belief! What is reality? How can you prove reality? And please don’t respond by saying that there is nothing to prove! If there is nothing to prove, then why have religion, books, teachings, or anything for that matter. And why was the mind created if it has no beneficial purpose in some way?

I have asked many Rinpoches, monks, gurus, etc., these questions and none of them can ever give me an answer, so who is knowledgeable and who is enlightened? Why should I ever follow or listen to those that do not know or at least cannot explain anything that would make sense to an ignoramus? Oh, yes, they use wonderful language for explaining a question as if they are the higher beings that you are not, and yet I notice that their characters have not changed, they are as selfish and materialistic as any of us!

I like this quote on belief:

“Cognitive Dissonance - Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalise, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief. - Frantz Fanon”

Maybe I too fall into this trap of cognitive dissonance. Maybe my subjective mind imagines that a knowledgeable person, or enlightened one, should not resemble the masses in any way and that they can not only explain to me in simple language what is true but actually show me.

I continue my path of discovery, even if it leads me nowhere!

[trd]

All definitions are and always will be imprecise. Anything you add to yourself is getting further away from yourself. Discard all definitions. Discard all religious scripture. Kill the Buddha.

How would it be possible to kill "the" Buddha when said Buddha is already liberated from the cycle of birth and death ?

The man called Buddha died 2,500 years ago. If he merged with the infinite he is no longer the man called Buddha.

Died?

He was already liberated from the cycle of birth and death

The body of a man called Prince Gautama later to be known as the Buddha was born and died. His true nature was realized to be that which is not born and does not die.

[CapeCobra]

If all these explanations are “subjective property of the mind”, then all these books and orally teachings are nothing but money-making activities. Are we all being deceived yet again? I have had some experiences that relate to various teachings, so now I wonder whether my mind created it all and nothing is really true or real. Has my mind imagined it all? Has the mind deceived all these so-called holy men?

Has anyone ever truly met an enlightened person? I haven’t!

Another question – why is there always a hierarchy in all religions? If we are supposedly all one, why the difference? As far as I am concerned, this is all man-made to boost the ego to those in so-called knowledge and to lower those in so-called ignorance. Mankind is indeed the biggest deceiver of himself and likes to worship a father-figure!

Belief, belief, belief! What is reality? How can you prove reality? And please don’t respond by saying that there is nothing to prove! If there is nothing to prove, then why have religion, books, teachings, or anything for that matter. And why was the mind created if it has no beneficial purpose in some way?

I have asked many Rinpoches, monks, gurus, etc., these questions and none of them can ever give me an answer, so who is knowledgeable and who is enlightened? Why should I ever follow or listen to those that do not know or at least cannot explain anything that would make sense to an ignoramus? Oh, yes, they use wonderful language for explaining a question as if they are the higher beings that you are not, and yet I notice that their characters have not changed, they are as selfish and materialistic as any of us!

I like this quote on belief:

“Cognitive Dissonance - Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalise, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief. - Frantz Fanon”

Maybe I too fall into this trap of cognitive dissonance. Maybe my subjective mind imagines that a knowledgeable person, or enlightened one, should not resemble the masses in any way and that they can not only explain to me in simple language what is true but actually show me.

I continue my path of discovery, even if it leads me nowhere!

Yes, I second that. The Germans say "Der Weg ist das Ziel". There are similar proverbs in English. Maybe, the best is "the journey is the reward".

Cognitive dissonant beliefs cannot be avoided. We must reduce their importance and add consonant beliefs.

Here is a song that deals with the problem.

Search in Youtube:

Cognitive dissonance (Dissonant & Justified):

Happy New Year!

CapeCobra

Edited December 31, 2014 by CapeCobra

[trd]

Objective verification and, to a similar degree, shared experiences are verification of an objective experience.

It's called 'science' - which I understand is a foreign concept to the believers in 'woo'.

There is no science without the consciousness of the perceiver of it. The external world is a manifestation of mind and senses. Can you prove there is material existence outside your mind? So if you are interested in truth, find out what the experiencer is. This has nothing to do with belief. Edited December 31, 2014 by trd

[DaffyDuck]

(rolls eyes) - considering material existence existed for 14 billion years before your own consciousness, and will continue to exist for 3 trillion years after it ceases to exist, I think the case for objective reality is pretty sound.

Everything else is navel gazing.

[trd]

(rolls eyes) - considering material existence existed for 14 billion years before your own consciousness, and will continue to exist for 3 trillion years after it ceases to exist, I think the case for objective reality is pretty sound.

Everything else is navel gazing.

What happened millions of years ago or five minutes ago is not in your immediate experience. Only the consciousness of the present moment is. It is the only thing you can experience. This thread is about awakening, not belief.

[RandomSand]

Died?

He was already liberated from the cycle of birth and death

The body of a man called Prince Gautama later to be known as the Buddha was born and died. His true nature was realized to be that which is not born and does not die.

Yes but he delivered that message whilst he was alive !

You're suggesting he's saying "The real me will not die. Only my body will die".

How is that any different to regular reincarnation ?

According to what you believe; "The Buddha" might have simply been wrong and may have actually been reincarnated as an Icelandic Eskimo.

So' At what point does liberation from reincarnation actually occur ?

Perhaps reincarnation is garbage. How can anyone know for sure that reincarnation is real ?

Edited December 31, 2014 by RandomSand

[trd]

Died?

He was already liberated from the cycle of birth and death

The body of a man called Prince Gautama later to be known as the Buddha was born and died. His true nature was realized to be that which is not born and does not die.

Yes but he delivered that message whilst he was alive !

You're suggesting he's saying "The real me will not die. Only my body will die".

How is that any different to regular reincarnation ?

According to what you believe; "The Buddha" might have simply been wrong and may have actually been reincarnated as an Icelandic Eskimo.

So' At what point does liberation from reincarnation actually occur ?

Perhaps reincarnation is garbage. How can anyone know for sure that reincarnation is real ?

So tell me what you think.

[RandomSand]

Died?

He was already liberated from the cycle of birth and death

The body of a man called Prince Gautama later to be known as the Buddha was born and died. His true nature was realized to be that which is not born and does not die.

Yes but he delivered that message whilst he was alive !

You're suggesting he's saying "The real me will not die. Only my body will die".

How is that any different to regular reincarnation ?

According to what you believe; "The Buddha" might have simply been wrong and may have actually been reincarnated as an Icelandic Eskimo.

So' At what point does liberation from reincarnation actually occur ?

Perhaps reincarnation is garbage. How can anyone know for sure that reincarnation is real ?

So tell me what you think.

Of what you claim lays beyond death; is actually your present state.

Of your present state right now: is what you believe lays over the rainbow.

...and of what actually lays over the rainbow; is what you mistakenly believe about your present state.

You can't see your present state because you are it already.

Edited December 31, 2014 by RandomSand

[trd]

Died?

He was already liberated from the cycle of birth and death

The body of a man called Prince Gautama later to be known as the Buddha was born and died. His true nature was realized to be that which is not born and does not die.

Yes but he delivered that message whilst he was alive !

You're suggesting he's saying "The real me will not die. Only my body will die".

How is that any different to regular reincarnation ?

According to what you believe; "The Buddha" might have simply been wrong and may have actually been reincarnated as an Icelandic Eskimo.

So' At what point does liberation from reincarnation actually occur ?

Perhaps reincarnation is garbage. How can anyone know for sure that reincarnation is real ?

So tell me what you think.

Of what you claim lays beyond death; is actually your present state.

Of your present state right now: is what you believe lays over the rainbow.

...and of what actually lays over the rainbow; is what you mistakenly believe about your present state.

You can't see your present state because you are it already.

Exactly. You are already that which you are. You cannot add anything to make yourself complete. It is just a matter of removing the ignorance which prevents you from being it. This has nothing to do with any kind of belief. The present or natural state is deathless (not beyond death) because it is not time bound which is just a creation of mind.

[rockyysdt]

If all these explanations are “subjective property of the mind”, then all these books and orally teachings are nothing but money-making activities. Are we all being deceived yet again? I have had some experiences that relate to various teachings, so now I wonder whether my mind created it all and nothing is really true or real. Has my mind imagined it all? Has the mind deceived all these so-called holy men?

Has anyone ever truly met an enlightened person? I haven’t!

Another question – why is there always a hierarchy in all religions? If we are supposedly all one, why the difference? As far as I am concerned, this is all man-made to boost the ego to those in so-called knowledge and to lower those in so-called ignorance. Mankind is indeed the biggest deceiver of himself and likes to worship a father-figure!

Belief, belief, belief! What is reality? How can you prove reality? And please don’t respond by saying that there is nothing to prove! If there is nothing to prove, then why have religion, books, teachings, or anything for that matter. And why was the mind created if it has no beneficial purpose in some way?

I have asked many Rinpoches, monks, gurus, etc., these questions and none of them can ever give me an answer, so who is knowledgeable and who is enlightened? Why should I ever follow or listen to those that do not know or at least cannot explain anything that would make sense to an ignoramus? Oh, yes, they use wonderful language for explaining a question as if they are the higher beings that you are not, and yet I notice that their characters have not changed, they are as selfish and materialistic as any of us!

I like this quote on belief:

“Cognitive Dissonance - Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalise, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief. - Frantz Fanon”

Maybe I too fall into this trap of cognitive dissonance. Maybe my subjective mind imagines that a knowledgeable person, or enlightened one, should not resemble the masses in any way and that they can not only explain to me in simple language what is true but actually show me.

I continue my path of discovery, even if it leads me nowhere!

I don't think it's a question of whether our lives are real or not.

Rather that they are anchored with that which is impermanent and conditioned, masking our true nature, that which is permanent & unconditioned.

The reason for hierarchies in religion, doubts, & attachment to beliefs, is (if the teachings are true) due to our attachment to greed, delusion, & aversion.

We can either continue to plod along mired in our attachments, or regularly practice Mindfulness & Samadhi in order to reveal that which is.

That's part of the thrust of the OP.

Is practice worthwhile, not knowing whether there is a permanent unconditioned state or not?

Is it just another religious myth?

Whether true or not, are there benefits of practice regardless?

Edited December 31, 2014 by rockyysdt