Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Non Duality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old 01-12-2017, 04:46 PM
Iamit Iamit is offline
Guide
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: West Wales. u.k
Posts: 684
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jyotir


Hi Iamit,

It is well established that intuition in its native status is infinitely and inherently more reliable than the de facto dominant concrete and rational mental (even vital) processes - reasoning, doubt, prejudices, aversions, etc., which can, and certainly do often taint, overwhelm, or distort those intuitions in the untransformed being, as they descend into waking consciousness. Who hasn’t experienced this (especially in retrospect)?

But that doesn’t invalidate the more substantial point conveniently sidestepped - that the reliability of intuition when in its purer manifestations, comes from a direct subjective identification which is accessible by, to, from, in, and through oneness, which is an intimate and immediate knowing from identity of self, regardless of how differentiated. (the leaf knowing it is the tree also knows the roots)

The practice and benefit of meditation is that it can clarify cognition by tranquilizing the grosser mental attachments/movements allowing for increasingly consistent experience in the subjective self, and therefore provide normalization of intuitive insight, thus surpassing the conditional limitations of objective cognition.

Projection in a way, is the inverse of intuition. It is an externalized attribution of that (cognition) which is internally untransformed in the projector; an (unconsciously) objectified self-identification which is usually not reliable except in its falseness, e.g., maya/appearance. It’s why animals, in another version of projection endemic to that 'kingdom', attack and devour those other animals that demonstrate the quality of animation/vital energy, with commensurate consequences. The residuals of this aggression/defensive dynamic are still very much present in human beings even if substantially combined with mind as desire-mind and can manifest as aggression and acquisitiveness unless and until transformed into a more benign dynamism and self-giving.

Contrary to popular conception, this ‘conditioning’ often spoken of in contemporary psychological terms is borrowed by spiritual aspirants who seem to rely on these metaphors (physics, social science, etc.) to explain metaphysics and spirituality, since those meta-forms are the most available and familiar. However this conditioning so-called is not really a social phenomenon, although ‘obvious’ and tempting as a na´ve conclusion. The real conditional aspect of ‘conditioning’ in the spiritual context is profoundly fundamental to physical existence itself, and precedes and subsumes any social dynamics (i.e., punishment, rejection, etc.) as manifestations superficially perceived.

~ J

Well I am glad you feel confident that your character is clear of conditioning you may have repressed:) to judge with what you think is your intuition clear of distortion, what an experience is like for another. I would not trust that particularly in such a sensitve matter as sitting in judgment of another about whether thier experience was genuine or not concerning the end of the spiritual search. But that is typical of the arrogance of TA when considering NA.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 01-12-2017, 11:46 PM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,552
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jyotir


Hi Iamit,

It is well established that intuition in its native status is infinitely and inherently more reliable than the de facto dominant concrete and rational mental (even vital) processes - reasoning, doubt, prejudices, aversions, etc., which can, and certainly do often taint, overwhelm, or distort those intuitions in the untransformed being, as they descend into waking consciousness. Who hasn’t experienced this (especially in retrospect)?

But that doesn’t invalidate the more substantial point conveniently sidestepped - that the reliability of intuition when in its purer manifestations, comes from a direct subjective identification which is accessible by, to, from, in, and through oneness, which is an intimate and immediate knowing from identity of self, regardless of how differentiated. (the leaf knowing it is the tree also knows the roots)

The practice and benefit of meditation is that it can clarify cognition by tranquilizing the grosser mental attachments/movements allowing for increasingly consistent experience in the subjective self, and therefore provide normalization of intuitive insight, thus surpassing the conditional limitations of objective cognition.

Projection in a way, is the inverse of intuition. It is an externalized attribution of that (cognition) which is internally untransformed in the projector; an (unconsciously) objectified self-identification which is usually not reliable except in its falseness, e.g., maya/appearance. It’s why animals, in another version of projection endemic to that 'kingdom', attack and devour those other animals that demonstrate the quality of animation/vital energy, with commensurate consequences. The residuals of this aggression/defensive dynamic are still very much present in human beings even if substantially combined with mind as desire-mind and can manifest as aggression and acquisitiveness unless and until transformed into a more benign dynamism and self-giving.

Contrary to popular conception, this ‘conditioning’ often spoken of in contemporary psychological terms is borrowed by spiritual aspirants who seem to rely on these metaphors (physics, social science, etc.) to explain metaphysics and spirituality, since those meta-forms are the most available and familiar. However this conditioning so-called is not really a social phenomenon, although ‘obvious’ and tempting as a na´ve conclusion. The real conditional aspect of ‘conditioning’ in the spiritual context is profoundly fundamental to physical existence itself, and precedes and subsumes any social dynamics (i.e., punishment, rejection, etc.) as manifestations superficially perceived.

~ J
Very nicely said, as usual.

It always brings a smile to my lips whenever logic is defended by the illogical, as we can plainly see from the post above this one.

Your summation reminds me of the story from the Chhandogya Upanishad:

Quote:
Uddaalak said - "Svetaketu, Have you ever asked your teacher for that instruction by which we hear what cannot be heard, by which we perceive what cannot be perceived, by which we know what cannot be known?
Shwetketu said - "What is that instruction, Sir?"

The father replied - "My dear, just as by a single lump of clay, all that is made of clay is known, all modifications being only a name based upon words, (the difference being only a name arising from speech) but the truth being that all is clay thus, my dear, is that instruction."
"Please Sir, explain this to me further." said Shwetketu.

Uddalaka - "Bring me a fruit of that Nyagrodh tree (banyan tree)."
Shwetketu - "Here is one, Sir."
Uddalaka - "Break it."
Shwetketu - "It is broken, Sir."
Uddaalak - "What do you see there?"
Shwetketu - "Those extremely small seeds, Sir."
Uddaalak - "Break one of them, my dear."
Shwetketu - "It is broken, Sir."
Uddaalak - "What do you see there?"
Shwetketu - "Nothing, Sir."

The father said - "My son, that subtle essence which you do not perceive there, of that very essence this great Nyagrodha tree, grows (exists). Believe me, my son. Now, that which is the subtle essence (the root of all) in That all that exists has its Self; that is the Self; That is the Truth; That thou art, O Shwetketu!"
Shwetketu said - "Please, Sir, explain to me further."
"Be it so, my child," replied the father.

Uddaalak - "Place this salt in the water and come to me in the morning."
Shwetketu, the son, did as he was commanded.
Next day the father said to him - "Bring the salt, my dear, which you put in the water last night." The son looked for it and did not find it, for it had become dissolved.

The father said - "My child, taste it from the surface of the water. How is it?"
The son replied - "It is salt."
Uddaalak - "Taste it from the middle. How is it?"
The son replied - "It is salt."
Uddalak - "Taste it from the bottom. How is it?"
The son replied - "It is salt."
The father said - "Throw it away and come to me."
The son did so; It exists for ever.
Then the father said to him - "Here also in this body, forsooth, you do not perceive the Truth (Sat or Pure Being), my son, but there it is indeed."
The father said - "Now that which is the subtle essence (the root of all), in That all that exists has its Self: That is the Self; that is the Truth; That thou art; O Shwetketu.

http://www.oocities.org/hindupuraan/...-shwetketu.htm
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 05-12-2017, 02:13 AM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,292
  Gem's Avatar
Vedanta and the temple

.........................
__________________
.
Check out my signature.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 05-12-2017, 02:26 PM
Jyotir Jyotir is offline
Master
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,496
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1wakesup
Either will suffice as everything said on this forum is unknowingly unattributed anyway. Yet again, hearing that from a mind still identified with a centered someone/self can only agree or disagree with this path or that path. Which is why its difficult for this mind to engaged with life in this moment and so almost impossible to remain detatched from the idea of enlightenment.

The one who is ignorant to its connection, the one requiring the feeling to be connected and the one believing its already connected all come from the same conditioning/illusion/assumtion that there is one there to connect with IT in the first place. It's this solid point of perception thats only holding on to another version (and of course a more evolved or awakened version at that) of itself.

Gardeners in the act of truly gardening are not so concerned with the harvest.

Hi no1wakesup,

The garden, the gardener, and the gardening are all one and the same.
The harvest in that metaphor is the realization of this in the physical.

Of course the gardener is concerned!
Otherwise there would be no garden, no gardening, no harvest.
This is why Krishna said, “ If I stopped working, the whole Universe would cease to exist.” In other words, the universe was created out of God's Compassion.

The ‘idea’ of enlightenment comes from the ideal of enlightenment which comes from the Light itself - the infinite consciousness which is emergent in the physical as the physical, and significantly for self-conscious human beings, as the spiritual aspiration which is nothing other than that same light in the form of concern and compassion recognized and effectuated in and through yoga - which is precisely why seekers are discussing spiritual matters on a website devoted to spiritual matters. Of course, this can be arbitrarily and conveniently denied and arbitrarily dismissed as 'stories' as participants see fit according to the dominant preference of the non-dual forum. However...

An arid intellectual asceticism that accepts a static undifferentiated whole as Being (neti-neti), but rejects oneness in its dynamic multiplicity of becoming (iti-iti) as the one-same whole Identity, is not Advaita, but a qualified dualism. Holding on to ‘this’ or detaching from ‘that’ yields the same result: “agree or disagree with this path or that path”; “holding on to another version”. It’s a preference that separates and divides.

~ J

Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 05-12-2017, 02:48 PM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 8,552
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jyotir

An arid intellectual asceticism that accepts a static undifferentiated whole as Being (neti-neti), but rejects oneness in its dynamic multiplicity of becoming (iti-iti) as the one-same whole Identity, is not Advaita, but a qualified dualism. Holding on to ‘this’ or detaching from ‘that’ yields the same result: “agree or disagree with this path or that path”; “holding on to another version”. It’s a preference that separates and divides.

~ J

Yes...yes...YES!

I shall again quote Nisargadatta Maharaj in regards:

Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 06-12-2017, 12:32 AM
revolver revolver is offline
Deactivated Account
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,121
  revolver's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimrich
I would offer this piece by Tony Parsons to explain the current difference between Neo-Advaita & Classical Advaita.
https://www.theopensecret.com/traditionalnottwo.html
My take on it is that I already am That but I was programmed, by other programmed folks, to believe that I am a limited, separate person in a world of other separate, limited persons/objects and so I LOST my original sense of Oneness or Unity (not-two) at a very early age. I've been "seeking" for a long time and now, thanks to the new teachers like Tony, I can see that I never lost anything and always was and always will be That or whatever it's called. This is it!
Actually you haven't lost anything, its there within you, it has never left you.
__________________
"A really egoless person is not humble at all.
He is neither arrogant nor humble; he is simply himself."
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums