to accept all of me, that is. In the west - shorthand for monotheisms and athiesm - I am told there is a primarily dead universe and no God or a primarily dead universe and a God. I am shamed by the athiest (rationalists) for accepting many of my experiences as real and guilt tripped and taught to think of sex and my body as bad by the monotheists. Emotions and desire judged all around. So off the east. It sounds better at first, more acceptance of odd experiences, more love of nature - theoretically. A certain expressed interest in spontanaity - think ZEN. But then after a bit, here we go again, fear and anger judged. Control of the body worshipped. Disidentification with many parts of myself that are just as much holy and me as the spark of consciousness in the upper chakras that seems to want to be the only spiritual thing. The west and it's brutishness or deadness or the east with it's internal fascism. No. Not for me. There is something deeper. If you listen you can hear it calling or feel its pull.
I understand what you're saying, there's one part of you that wants to be in that blissful state of the upper chakras, but another part that feels that something is missing when in that supposedly ever-blissful state, right? Well just remember what the true enlightenment and true perfection is, it isn't simply the activation of the upper chakras, it is the destruction of all defiling impulses (or insecurities), where in all desires are fulfilled (interally), that very feeling of something missing will not exist and everything will feel right, you will enjoy every instant to the highest degree and be able to enjoy both parts of yourself (spiritual and material), otherwise anything contrary to this is not the real perfection, if the happiness isn't truly the highest degree of happiness, if there exist even the slightest smallest degree of suffering then it isn't the actual perfection, its just the hippie type of happiness, where you pretend to be happy but deep down you're not. The true happiness is where everything within you feels right, so there is not even one moment of suffering and you enjoy every moment...
regardless whether you are an atheist/theist, eastern/western, man/woman etc/etc .... if you think you can be a happy human in this world without discipline, you set yourself up for a lifetime of frustration. (In other words the real successes in life often appear like poison in the beginning) You are correct that there is something deeper than mere rules and regulations, but to suggest that spiritual life must operate without discipline (especially for a conditioned soul) is to run the danger of meeting constant set backs due to one's conditioned nature SB 6.1.11: Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the son of Vedavyāsa, answered: My dear King, since acts meant to neutralize impious actions are also fruitive, they will not release one from the tendency to act fruitively. Persons who subject themselves to the rules and regulations of atonement are not at all intelligent. Indeed, they are in the mode of darkness. Unless one is freed from the mode of ignorance, trying to counteract one action through another is useless because this will not uproot one's desires. Thus even though one may superficially seem pious, he will undoubtedly be prone to act impiously. Therefore real atonement is enlightenment in perfect knowledge, Vedānta, by which one understands the Supreme Absolute Truth.
I don't think that quote supports your statements above. But in any case I disagree with it completely. Discipline assumes a split in yourself and reinforces it. The conscious mind attempts to control all the bad parts of the self - not that most eastern religions are honest enough to call them 'bad', they prefer to imply. If you accept desires and bring them into yourself the destructive habits associated with them heal over time. Not that this is easy. I am tired of all the religions telling me I must be split against myself ad then telling which parts are bad. Like that quote above in relation to desire. It's an old, culture bound judgement. I learned to play guitar and well through desire. I never set a time or gave my self commands or forced myself to do anything. If you don't have the desire to do something, perhaps your gifts or life role lies elsewhere. THERE IS NO NEED TO LISTEN TO THE VOICES THAT TELL YOU YOUR DESIRES ARE EVIL. (or any watered down version that implies they mess you up) The people who made those judgements did not know any better and they did not learn from their own desires. Their loss.
Not me, in any case. Of course one can apply discipline to things one likes or loves. But there is no need. 'I will see my friends, three times each week, and make sure I laugh twice and be silly at least once.' The point of my guitar example - and learning a musical instrument is a common interest where one is told one has to have discipline - was that one can learn something complicated and 'hard' without discipline. I meant this both literally and as a metaphor for spiritual matters. Desire, which is judged by eastern religions as bad or in your watered down bad as focussing on the short term and not the long term, is just fine. If your desire is leading you into problems than you are not paying attention to certain emotions, often fear. If you follow desire and suppress fear, you can hurt yourself and others. funny thing is fear is also judged as bad in these religions which end up being lessons in how to control and prune yourself. I tried that. What I felt was that I was being trained to whittle myself down and to judge portions of myself that are actually the source of life itself. So I stopped. If you want to whittle yourself down, I have no problem with that. Various eastern mytics, gurus and masters who made judgements about the emotions and desire. Hey, I am not knocking them. they did their best. In their time and culture. They thought you had to judge these portions of the self. but they were wrong. By what they teach me. By what they think we need to learn. by what they have written. By what they have said they learned and how they learned it.
Vital one: in that phrase 'defiling insecurities' you have judgements about one of your own emotions. An emotions you would like to destroy. In the East one is taught to accept all that is outside you, but certain emotions are 'defiling', for example. For me I have found riches, whole portions of myself in those insecurities, that were in fact parts of me with deep insight and intuition. But more basically than that, to destroy them, as you suggest, would be to destroy a part of myself. That is not love.
Grantywanty dealing with fear and other emmotions also requires discipline only thing is that i don't experience the whittling and you are also making judgments unlike a conditioned soul, who makes judgments according to their imperfect senses and tendency to fall into illusion, a saintly persons has access to a higher grade of knowledge what do you think are the qualifications of a spiritual teacher and what are the qualifications of a student?
Nope, all that is required is loving acceptance of one's own emotions. We have long been trained not to do this so it can seem hard at first. might not be the right metaphor to bring it into your awareness. Of course. I am not saying that judgements are right or wrong. I am saying that telling people to judge and disclipline portions of themselves like their emotions and desire is the way to salvation or nirvana or enlightenment is not loving in relation to the self. It create and/or reinforces splits. And all the judgements made about what must happen to you if you don't follow their rules - like the not so hidden prediction about 'long term' problems faced by following desire - are not true judgements. I have sympathy for the error, but it is an error. One does not have to end up suffering if one dives into one's desire, as long as you don't make the hedonists mistakes of not listening to fear or listening to their bodies' needs. That's what they say. And notice the metaphor. It is not a coincidence that 'higher' is supposed to be better than 'lower'. Thee religions are very much the ideas and judgements of people who were afraid of their lower chakras and felt the need to control them. And they looked down on or considered them 'less evolved' those people who could not control and suppress the lower chakras as well. I think this tack will get us nowhere, but I have learned the most from people who were truly grounded in their bodies and emotions and not so much from those who told me bodies adn emotions were the source of all the problems. But we've each stated our cases to a degree and having tried your kind of paths and having discovered that they institutionalize a kind of self-hatred based on judgements of the body and emotions there is no way I can be convinced those paths are actually loving ones. I know that down to my balls. I also doubt you will be swayed by me. It's not a mental thing. Maybe somewhere down the line while you're meditating or whatever your disciplines are you will feel how there is hate built into the system you are trying so hard to fit yourself into. But probably not. But I think we've gone as far as words here will take us. Good luck. May you get what you want.
Great, so why bother us about it? What do you want? Desire isn't bad, that is a corruption of Buddhist teaching, it just has consequences. No one is encouraging you to turn against your own nature, only know that what you thought was you might actually be a bit of information implanted in your illusionary self by the culture in which you live. If you have the courage to see yourself as you really are, you will find something more extraordinary than temporal illusions... freedom. Buddhist method is intentionally confusing and difficult. It creates a second you as an observer of you in order to force you to see in the end that there is no self at all. It creates paradox to trick the brain. It's a technology of the mind. Buddhism isn't the end, it's the means. The end product is not a Buddhist, but a true individual. This is what the parable of the raft means. You use the raft to cross the river, but don't then carry it around on your head.
Defiling impulses are the ones that cause you anger, fear, sorrow, doubt, misery, etc....and even this very problem you face right now. If you could simply destroy the impulse causing this very problem, it would simply disappear forever... Ah, I see your point, but that is not what I'm saying. You see the true happiness, the real happiness would be where you enjoy eternal happiness and enjoy all parts of your own self, not where you destroy some parts of you and are left empty inside. This could not be the true perfection. You think that if you destroy the impulses causing your own problems you'll destroy some parts of you inside, but in reality you wouldn't, you'll simply be destroying the undesirable parts of you (the ones causing you suffering) and be magnifying the desirable parts of you (the ones causing you happiness). And eventually, you would reach a state where all the insecurities (or impulses causing you suffering) would be completely destroyed, and therefore you would enjoy every moment to the very very highest degree, because all that would remain is the light, the real light, the real happiness, the real perfection, and you would not have that feeling of loss, all parts of you would feel right, and you would feel like your true self. Just know that you can destroy insecurities within you and still enjoy the parts you that you fear you'll miss, and that very impulse of "not having this feeling" would be gone forever, because you would always have that feeling, you would always have that part of you, it would still exist. The things that wouldn't exist anymore is all forms of suffering. There are many different types of happiness. There's the enjoyment type of happiness that comes from having fun, partying, etc....there's the sensory happiness from gratifying the senses, sex pleasure, etc...there's the hippie happiness where you say you don't care what anyone thinks you'll just be happy, and then there's the void happiness which is like deep relaxation, where there's nothingness, no emotion at all.... But none of these forms of happiness can be the actual true happiness. The true happiness is where you enjoying every moment the very very very highest degree, unlike the void-state, you still have high-energy and a feeling of fulfillment, all of your desires are fulfilled, there is not even one second of suffering, everything in you, I mean everything feels right, you have transcended even the mode of goodness (which is where hippies and peacemakers reside)... Know that if you are experiencing any type suffering, including this feeling of losing some part of you inside, that you are not experiencing the true perfection, the highest degree of happiness...
grantywanty “ hence the discipline since we struggle withour conditioned nature, as indicated the point is that desire is not the enemy - it is a double edged sword BG 6.5: One must deliver himself with the help of his mind, and not degrade himself. The mind is the friend of the conditioned soul, and his enemy as well. one should not spontaneously reject something because it is a desire nor should one spontaneously accept something because it is a desire - the reason being that desires are arrived at through our imperfect senses (you may feel the desire to scream at a rope that looks like a snake) What do you mean by "lower chakras"? Genitals? At least its a common complaint by women what "chakra" a man tends to do his thinking with ...... what does it mean to be grounded in one's body? what does it mean to be 'less' grounded in one's body? the reason I am asking is because your statements about judgments and inevitable failures of spirituality seem to indicate that your spiritual foundations (such as the qualifications of a spiritual teacher and the qualifications of a student) are not fully comprehended, hence my original q that lower chakra again eh? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! lol - don't worry - its hardly a phenomena of internet discussion, particularly on the topic of philosophy/religion adios amigo
Grantywanty i understand where youre comming from, eastern philosophy works and 'seems' appealing in relation to western life philosophies. But really youre just engaging with another series of blind alleys. I think the problem with eastern philosophy lies in the nature of what is deemed as illusionary and what is proported as 'real'. I believe all states of consciousness have just as much claim to validity as any other. Ego-disintergration isnt a truer form of experience its simply 'another' form of experience, this is what eastern philosophy fails to get to grips with. Theres no real/illusion dichotomy, theres simply endless sides to an infinite-sided coin. Therefore chasing after zen experiences while shunning mundane everyday life its utterally missing the point. You end up as lost and ignorant as a person living their day to day life without any sense of the holistic experiences that lie beyond. Basically belief systems by their very nature are over the top and dogmatic, best bet imo is (as offen with things) is to take the middle ground.
By this logic a dream is just as real as reality, and someone who realizes that the dream is not real is just the same as someone who believes the dream is real. Well I agree here. You would become hippie-like if you did that, caught up the in the material mode of goodness, when the true goal is go beyond all material nature, transcending all modes.
Given proper context, anything can be real or fake, it's entirely dependent on perspective. My particular eastern philosophy of choice (Taoism) advocates that to some extent, and I've definitely picked up on it in SEVERAL cases in the "real world", which, given proper context, is fake. Same with a dream, it's very real WHILE YOU'RE DREAMING, but from an "awakened" perspective, it's not. Point of view is the foundation upon which so many "great truths" stand. And in contrast to statements about eastern philosophy advocating the exodus from desire, I'd like to correct that Buddhism almost exclusively advocates this. Confucianism is, realistically, a rigid, binding code of "ethics" towards ancestry and family and especially government, and says little about personal desire. Taoism, again, my path of choice, simply advocates compassionate, spontaneous, natural action, and harmony between extremes, so don't strive to eliminate desires, in fact, don't strive at all, simply free yourself from necessity and don't let either end of the spectrum control you.
The Buddha never said desire causes suffering, he said craving or desperation causes suffering. After becoming Supremely Enlightened, Gautama Buddha still had desires, he even said "I never see what has been done; I only see what remains to be done", but his desires were free from material entanglement, not born from insecurity. Taoism seems to advocate realizing the Tao, the Tao seems to be the same as Brahm in Hinduism, as it is defined the Tao Te Ching: "There is a thing, formless yet complete. Before heaven and earth it existed. Without sound, without substance, it stands alone and unchanging. It is all-pervading and unfailing. One may think of it as the mother of all beneath Heaven. We do not know its name, but we call it Tao. Deep and still, it seems to have existed forever" (4)
Mmhmm, I'm acquainted with someone who practices Advaita Vedanta in conjunction with Taoism, and says they work naturally hand in hand with one another. And my apologies with Buddhism (everything I know about it seems to be being proven wrong of late). In this case, I would have to say the two are in agreement. It's ok to want, but the attachment to said want is what causes pain. So, in regards to this "something deeper" that both east and west seem to have cut out...how have you gotten in touch with it, all of you?
