The Fact of Death

..continued 'Awakened' is obviously something which would be next to be examined for mechanism or process Is there an 'and' missing here? It doesn't read well. Again we would have to get to this more slowly and methodically. Many paths to the summit as it were but all containing some trancedent idea making the route irrelevant. The idea we'll be probably investigating Could you give a simple working definition of non-dual for the sake of clarity. Its a new term for me and I don't want to cross wires here Again probably this needs expansion. I don't see the 'I am' as the body either. The body is a vehicle for the 'I am' (does that mean I'm not not-dual but dual?)The root of the problem. What was the problem he was addressingForgive the ignorance Lfen but this stuff is new to me. I read Zen and the Art once but tended to skip to the motorcycle bits Also, if you can think of a step wise approach so that this is kept manageable then I'd appreciate it. You can see that all I can do is ask questions. But if your answer will mean I have to ask a bunch more then I won't be able to follow.What is the critical issue - like say salvation is in Christianity - and spread from there? I don't know if this lends itself to such an approach

I use Firefox and typically have several tabs going so I don't bother to log out of EvC. As it was I wasn't even at my keyboard but had popped out to pick up a few groceries and then stopped by the library for a couple of books. Just a few minutes ago I checked my email and saw I had some responses awaiting. In short my browser was online but I was off somewheres in the real world. oh, man, you had to ask that?That's about as hard as questions get.I don't know what mind is, or even if it exactly is. still trying to find a way to talk about that one. But in the context of the Buddha's meditation I was using mind to refer to his observing his consciousness how thoughts, memories, fantasies, feelings, desire, aversions arose, and interacted.I'll move on to your continued post.lfen

It could be a comma would have preserved the sense of that sentence or it could be I should have worded it differently. I'll try this and see if it's clearer:After the conviction that I am "so and so" (that is to say after the conviction that I am a self) leaves the human consciousness (consciousness no longer has a sense of being an entity self) consciousness now simply experiences What IS.Dang, I forgot to check out Roberts book while I was at the library. She writes much better about this than I do. One of my main interests here is to just introduce these notions to westerners. Evos and Creos are typically dualist and have not heard this viewpoint. Your questions are very helpful to me in learning how to present this material.Historically Zen made an early impression on the West. Zen is orthodox Mahayana Buddhism but it's approach though very dramatic obscures it's teachings particularly if people don't know Buddhism and the history of the Chan/Zen school. In short I think Zen in the West has led to more confusion than understanding. Well I'll see how I do with this, no guarantees. I'll try a concise overview.As I understand orthodox Judeo/Chritianity it is dualistic. God is separate from what he created. I'd say at the moment mainly becuase of yours and Faith's post I probably have a better understanding of Calvinism than I do of other sects. So Christianity sees the suffering of human beings as a result of the Fall and that the solution lies in Salvation and eventually a new life in Heaven.Non dualist are addressing the same suffering and problems that all humans face so that is shared. That is we suffer, we do things we shouldn't do, etc. I'm not going to even try to include the Buddhist viewpoint in this as it just makes it too confusing. I'll stick with nondual(advaita) Vedanta because I think you can relate more clearly to a theistic expression.In Vedanta there is God, Sanskrit: Brahman. The individual in all their suffering is consciousness that is identifying with action in the drama of life and has lost awareness of it's true nature. All there is is God (we can call this Consciousness and some of the Upanishads and Ramana also use capital "S" Self to refer to this}. The manifest universe can then be likened to God's thoughts or dreams or imagination. What Judeo/Christianity identifies as sin this system would identify as a nightmare. Instead of salvation the cure is awakening. Consciousness wakes up and realizes that it is not the individual but the source of the individual.Now please keep in mind that this is a bad bad model. But I thought that if I approached it the way I wanted to it would take too long and you were wanting a quick way in.As Ramana was dying his devotees, and Ramana was regarded by many as an incarnation of Brahman pled with him not to leave them. Ramana's reply was to say, "Where could I go?". Ramana had repeatedly taught that the universe was in Consciousness, not consciousness in the body.
I'm using capital and lower case c to make a distinction but it's one I can't really define.The point wasn't that Ramana felt his body, or personality was the source of the Universe. He no longer identified with those things. He had awakened to and realized that he was never a separate anything and that all there IS, IS.Berndadette Roberts spent years in a Catholic convent contemplaing God and subjugating her will to God and seeking union. When she felt she had done that she left and raised a family. Her book The Experience of No Self begins with her sitting in a chapel and entering into a silence. When the chapel was closed she went home.She found herself struggling with her mental states and after some days when she looked within herself she was stunned to find she could no longer find the center that she called "self". Somewhere towards the end of the book she says something like, "God is What Is and All that is. All that is except for the self."So what is the self? And the answer is that whatever it is it's not real. It's an illusion and yet an illusion that is up to much mischief and suffering.lfenABE: I'm just adding a link that goes into more detail if it's of interest to anyone. Advaita Vedanta - WikipediaThis message has been edited by lfen, 05-07-2006 08:22 PM

The self is what matters--to the self.

Well put.

And the whole point of the self is that you are this and not that, and this is preferable to that, because it is you. What is most valuable to us is us. Without this sense of self we are nothing--might as well be dead. What is it that the self does? It tries to achieve, which means making us look good in some fashion. Ego drives all our actions.Moral feelings might be different, but possibly they are camouflages for a more subtle selfishness.Traditional religion--of whatever sort--says, we must go beyond the ego. This is not a notion to be dismissed out of hand, for we feel it a little.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 05-07-2006 09:51 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 05-07-2006 09:52 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 05-07-2006 09:53 PM

And it gets worse before it gets better. We can't go beyond the ego. We are the ego. The ego did not create itself and is powerless to remove itself. Although Christianity, Advaita, and Buddhism talk about it in very different ways they all seem to realize that the ego can't do anything about its own dilemma and its only recourse is grace. The reports from those who have experienced the loss of self is that life is never better. And most of us have been blessed with occasions when self forgetfulness gives us a taste of this condition.Perhaps you experienced a period of minutes, even hours, maybe days when the sense of self temporarily dropped away and the moment in all it's fullness was simply present and happening. Sometimes falling in love is like that for some people. Other have found it in moments out in nature. Some even claim to have found it in sport when suddenly they aren't playing the game of tennis, or golf or whatever but they feel like the game is just being played through them.lfen

I've never experienced that.

duplicate post.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 05-07-2006 10:24 PM

If you wish to answer this I'd be curious what you love most.Do you love music, or nature, the ocean? What brings you the greatest sense of peace and fulfillment?lfen

quote:

---

Perhaps you experienced a period of minutes, even hours, maybe days when the sense of self temporarily dropped away and the moment in all it's fullness was simply present and happening. Sometimes falling in love is like that for some people. Other have found it in moments out in nature. Some even claim to have found it in sport when suddenly they aren't playing the game of tennis, or golf or whatever but they feel like the game is just being played through them

​

I've never experienced that.

---

I did not have time to read all the posts. But, are you near the end of your life? I'm sad if this is true. Any number of platitudes would just be platitudes, and I can't think of any right now anyways. (That's good).
Is there a way in which I can help you? Please let me know.
FenrisBragi@hotmail.com
I'm Christian, but I'm not a God-pusher. We all come to our own conclusions as to what has meaning to us. Success depends on effort.
Best wishes.

I was doing what I suppose the Buddha was doing only last night. I was lying dozing off to sleep when suddenly a thought occurred in my 'mind'. It would be classified in the Christian context as a temptation. Just a notion, just a brief snapshot, a 3 second piece of video. For all intents and purposes "out of the blue".I bolted awake. I refused to allow my thoughts to pick up the thread of the snapshot and to run off down the direction of developing and expanding on the initial idea. Instead I directed my thoughts elsewhere - namely to going back to sleep. Thoughts were a vehicle which I could steer. Separate to 'I'Having been here before I know to keep my hand on the steering wheel. And sure enough, once awake to the notion, my thoughts took a wander over to the verge for a second bite of the cherry (attempted cherrying?). Again I steered them away. Now I am fully alert to my mind in action. I direct my thoughts away and let them meander along. My mind initially seemed happy to whistle innocently, looking anywhere but at this while I was paying close attention. No sooner have I relaxed the observation and direction and its Whoops! there it goes again. Trying to raid the cookie jar! Yanked back this time with a firm "No!" and a prayer.Three strikes and it was out, on this occasion and I dozed off again.Point being, Lfen. I was observing my mind at work. But 'I' wasn't my mind or my thoughts. I was observing my mind at work. It had a life of it own. I was acting like a 'parent' to 'its child'This message has been edited by iano, 08-May-2006 03:44 PM

Neither, particularly.

I hope not.

---

God does not "exist."---Paul Tillich, Christian theologian

Dealing with the first half of this paragraph. From the story above it seems clear that 'I' is independant of (and sits 'above') my thoughts. 'I' is not what I think. 'I' can observe thinking going on. 'I', it appears to me, is the consciousness. If so, then it cannot leave consciousness (itself). Unless there is some other division to cleaved in this 'I' level.If we can figure out what/how this occurs then we could perhaps be able to deal with the second half of the paragraph. Evangelical rhetoric you mean! Kettle Pot Black Lfen. Kettle, pot, black! I was right just to read the motorcycling bits then... That's about it. Although I'm not a Calvinist. I get the paralell. Dealing with the same issues but arriving at a different conclusion. Good. At least the thinking attempts to be complete.Lets take a look at prior to awakening. Can we safely take it at this point that the invidi(dual!) is not thoughts, emotions, body etc. That the individual can be boiled down to the 'I' as I described in my last post. In that case we can reword what you say above as:

quote:

---

The individual wakes up and realises it is not the individual but the source of the individual

---

I has asked yesterday about both 'mind' and 'awakening'. Perhaps it is time to look at this awakening. How an 'I' awakens to realise it is not an 'I' but the source of the 'I'. Ramana seemed to have arrived at this place. One would presumably want to know where this 'I' came from. How the jump to this realisation. We shouldn't pre-suppose that because someone lost the sense of self that the self was actually gone anywhere. We need to arrive at this conclusion slowly.Although I agree with the mischief and suffering bitThis message has been edited by iano, 08-May-2006 11:37 AM