If I could suggest an alternate conception of chapter 33. Notice how it is written as pairs where the first is horizontal and the second, vertical. The first occurs in linear time while the second relates to the quality of the moment itself
Wisdom here is knowledge of relationships; appreciating the nature of the reactions of others and the objective condition they reflect.
Self knowledge is vertical awareness in the quality of the moment itself. It is direct perception and not the comparison necessary for wisdom.
Mastering others only requires an external force from outside directed at another. Mastering the self requires an inner strength and not a result of an external source. It is an attribute of the quality of the moment of ones being as opposed to this applied force that is an external quality.
Enough for what? In the external sense this could mean money. In the internal sense when one feels they must change it is will expressed through perseverance that is one quality of “enough.”
Enduring is the state of active attention. It doesn’t get sucked into life but remains aware of being separate from it in this state of impartial attention which is the essence of karma Yoga.
When one experiences reality in this way, our normal illusory attachments are seen for what they are and gradually lose their hold. For a long time they’ve been a very dominant part of us and determining our life but now they die off and ones inner life, free of this slavery, can begin to live as presence and come into contact with the higher. Naturally this is very gradual. One higher experience doesn’t lead to sustained enlightenment and more often than not, initially a person’s sleep becomes deeper to compensate for this momentary experience of reality. This sleep is a fertile breeding ground for an incredible variety of “experts” to come up with the most ingenious rationalizations.
Suppose though that this state of presence or enlightenment isn’t merging with the absolute but actually that which receives from the higher and nourishes the lower as a result. This whole process would for the experience of real “feeling” and begin to vivify this presence or “soul”.
The topic is interesting, so I want to add an word, ‘mirage’. How far is it to reality and illusion, how does it affect to our mind, what is it supposed to be at all?
There is nowhere to travel. Reality is right here and right now. Our mind is the servant.
Nick,
JT suggests that enlightenment comes from letting go of attachment, our ideas of how we ‘think’ we know. There is nothing here that suggests that we should be oblivious. It’s not about being happy to accept our limitations. If either you or I or JT were happy with our limitations I believe we would be philosophising in another forum.
When Buddha said; “I am awake”. He meant I am free from illusion.
Awareness isn’t oblivion, and not-knowing isn’t oblivion either. You’ve read the Dao De Ching, but when you ask me if I equate being awake to being oblivious, you show me that you have failed to comprehend the most basic understanding.
You reference buddhist teaching, so let’s try this. A man builds a raft to cross an expanse of water, but upon reaching the far shore, leaves the raft behind. He does not drag the raft with him on his journey.
At some point, all the ‘tools’ of intellectualizing must be released if there is to be transcendant understanding.
It isn’t about levels and layers neatly graphed out. It isn’t about what others have said as if they are authority. To remain suspended in knowing is to re-create the illusions.
I ask YOU if you equate awakening with oblivion because I don’t know if YOU truly distinguish between deep sleep and awakening.
You lack any sense of scale. You remind me of a person planning what to do with a billion dollars without having considered acquiring it first. You completely underestimate how long you will need the raft since it is unpleasant to admit your inadequacy in the face of this journey.
At some point, all the ‘tools’ of intellectualizing must be released if there is to be transcendant understanding.
But we are far from that point. Without the sincere attempt at impartial attention, a person becomes victim to emotional self deception. In this way the emotions and intellect become complimentary and one helps the other. However, if self deception is not a concern of yours, then follow your emotions.
You do not understand contemplation. The importance isn’t in the ideas but in the process and quality of esoteric thought that the ideas inspire. As long as it remains free of egotistic interpretation, esoteric thought is of great value.
Cmon now. Thats not exactly the question. Thats like " was hitler good" and you saying “all people are sleeping buddhas”.
Im asking you wether or not you rate the advice osho gives to his followers as sound practical advice? What of his self styled ashrams in India? Are they good places to learn meditation/spirituality?
" Then there is a higher form of love “agape” which is related to consciousness. It seeks to allow the beloved to actualize itself even at ones own expense. Naturally this is very rare"
Last time. You need to look inward, my friend. Heal thyself. Stop projecting your theories onto others. Asleep? I guess! Wake up Nick. Let the crap go and see it for what it is - not for me or anyone else, for yourself.
If a person wants to begin to distinguish the potential of awakening, they first must appreciate sleep. I’m not ashamed to admit my nothingness so say what you like about me. However, if you want to begin a thread on illusion and reality, you must be open to the nature of the distinction both theoretically and as it relates to your own self knowledge. What this has to do with my projecting is beyond me.
The stoics realized that emotions cannot be trusted. Though quite true in many cases, it discounts the value of emotional potential as it relates to awakening so often those considering themselves stoic, demonstrate it by practicing the look of walking around with a stick up their behind trying to appear stoic for which only the stick benefits.
JT
I’m not the one here talking about peace amongst religions and who should tell others what to believe. If you recall, I’m the one stressing the value of individualism including myself.
Letting the crap go is not done by sticking your head in the sand imitating an ostrich.
I D
We are born with animal emotions natural for life on earth. Certain emotions have the capacity to develop just like a person could develop a talent into a skill. When these emotions are developed they are not limited to earthly discrimination but reflect a higher more spiritual, conscious, degree of discrimination.
Faith, hope,and love, exist in us in rudimentary form natural for us as a seed. Our love is selective and natural for animal life to discriminate within earthly influences. Agape is a higher form in that through conscious efforts a person develops the ability for the love of life itself through the practical experience of becoming impartially open to reality. This is not an imagined result of La La Land and wishful thinking but the ability to put life into perspective, experience its meaning, and the love that underlies it. It stems from an initiative higher than ourselves that a person can become consciously open to.
The mire of reality is illusion. We drown ourselves in illusion everyday. The illusion that everything will be alright, or some other similiar or different illusion.
The point is we have to seperate ourselves from illusion and “reality” to “awaken” to what is actual reality minus illusion.
What most people including yourself are living is reality mired in illusion.
Even I am stuck in the swamp.
What’s real? this mud below my feet.
What’s illusion? The desires in my mind.
What’s the combination of the two? to have your feet stuck in the mud.
We basically agree. We are both stuck in the mud. Is this all we are capable of? If yes, what is the best way to continue? Does itmatter?
If no and we desire something more real, what is the best way to continue? Do we try and imagine reality or strive to experience the mud without our normal rationalizations?
(2) don’t you mean “if no”? The best way to continue if you want to escape the trap of desire, is to remove desire. If you want moderation, you can still enjoy being in the mud and still feel the tinges of enlightenment.
(3) I don’t want to live in a world where something doesn’t matter.
(4) Who determines “what is more real”? Are my trials more real or more difficult than your own? Do I see the sky in a deeper shade of blue than you? Does that make it “more” real?
The weight of subjective reality.
(5) it’s not about “imagining” reality, it’s about HOW you view reality. Through the fog colored illusive glasses of desire, or through the objective transcendental glasses.
Reality looks very different depending on how you view it.
My answer was most pointed. We can learn from all people, regardless of their guru status. To make a value judgement based on hearsay is not really my style. It’s a matter of penetration and realisation my dear.
As far as Osho’s following in India, not really my cup of tea dear, I’m certainly no Sanyasin, but some of his writing is so deeply profound and moving that one is directed right to the heart.
(noun) 1 the action of deceiving; b (1) : the state or fact of being intellectually deceived or misled
So, tentative…
in this particular perspectiive would you consider someone who creates an illusion to another deceitful? Or does the illusion stand on its own - out there for anyone to deceive themselves. Is there culpability in creatiing an ongoing illusion to another? Also, doesn’t that illusion, if taken seriously by that person, then a reality? Isn’t reality that which feels real to a person… or do you think their reality is just an illusion as well?
