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 > Religions & Faiths > Buddhism

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old 28-05-2018, 05:07 AM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,075
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by naturesflow
Yes I understand. The direct perception is what opens us to reflect and gain for ourselves through the external offering, rather than take it on as "gospel" and letting it rule your reality as the knowing itself. 'We are the knowing' through the concepts that have learned for itself its own knowing. In this way the external becomes a guiding point to build the concepts as yourself.


Indeed, so how they decribed it at my school was there are levels of understanding, and when you hear the teachings or dhamma discourses you get an intellectual understanding which is purely conceptual, but it also piques the curiosity and initiates an actual exploration which results in real life insight of direct realisations - then the initial understanding becomes deeper and you 'get' what the teachings are talking about in the way that is true in your own life. It is kind of ironic because these are universal truths such as 'craving is suffering', for example, yet your own discovery of how you generate your own suffering is 'in the way you actually see that yourself'. Then this brings the 'lightbulb moment' from your own life to enrich your understand the initial teaching. Hence the truth of the matter is NOT written in dhamma teachings, but is realised in real lived realisation.



Quote:
The world is full of ideas and creations that try to show us the "best" way to do things but I have learned that the greatest source (if able and willing)is oneself, through that direct perception you mentioned and find its own knowing in the truth of something that resonates outside of ourselves that knows for itself. Buddhism has shown me in myself without Buddhist teachings, that the path I have walked has opened me quite naturally to align to the Guts of the teachings, not because I made it so, but simply because I have walked a more conscious mindful self reflective path.


Zactamondo! Thats what I'm trying to say teehee.


Quote:
I know that becoming aware of myself as deep as I can go into myself, brings to life many of the foundational precepts of Buddhism, without any study. For me the awareness within me opens me to become aware of myself opening to them most naturally just by being present with myself as a more "complete" opening within. I notice the movements of what transpires in me and it always takes me to the foundation of what I know would be called my true self or Buddha nature. I am aware of that point in myself and when life is happening outside of me, I know the depth of where I can go to open and feel my own clarity and awareness that fits me, more consciously aware and clear.



I think its only natural as one progresses along the path and dealing with deeper more difficult aspects, it can be an opportunity to deepen the practice itself by letting go of the self constraints, contained by the external and open to one's own inner world where your able to flow more freely with life as it is.


Tru dat.


Quote:
I speak about openness a lot in my writing, it may confuse some. I suppose what I mean in this way is the willingness


Sometimes I try to point out the difference between wilfulness and willingness, so I get what you're saying.



Quote:
to look and see, really take notice of yourself, feel and let go, open and gain the awareness of yourself more open to you, not what is moving outside of yourself.


Yes, it's all to do with 'the feel' you directly perceive which occurs within you.



Quote:
At the core of ourselves is our true nature that knows more directly the truth. That point in myself knows it cannot be closed off or contained to myself in any way. Now that I am aware of my own core of self, I am always lead back to it. There is no escape from myself in this view of myself, so all movements on the surface that move over this point in me (without attachment) will most often now days, be embraced through my true nature, which is peaceful and content with all things, even when things are not peaceful or in chaos.


True - thrse a part of me which is never disturbed, and some small part of my attention remains with that - but I become highly distracted and lose touch sometimes.



Quote:
My feeling is, unless you have entered the core of yourself, it would be difficult to be guided and walking in life more open and connected to the abundance of self that can reflect itself to others as this. I know people do their best, with what they have, but ultimately once aware of yourself, the work or practice, experience you choose will activate us to see and know for ourselves, who we really are, what is really important and how we fit into the greater picture of nature as our true nature more aligned as life is within us.




I usually think of it as 'the spirit' coming through to pervade every part of the body mind, so the practice of running the awareness through out the whole body is like 'awareness itself' pervading throughout. The work really involves arousing conscious awareness through from the hard physical aspects of the body through to the subtlest motions that form it. The mind is dull to some degree so the very subtle aspects are unconscious (what I call still asleep) and the practice works to wake up the as yet unknown subtle levels of the lifeform. One can feel hard things dissolving and feel hard areas start to move, which is what I term 'opening up' as new energies move through the places which were previously blocked up.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 28-05-2018, 06:52 AM
sky sky is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 15,533
  sky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
I think in a Buddhist context, the initial 'taking refuge in the Buddha' mostly pertains to a surrender to the enlightenment within, and it does not mean taking refuge in any person such as Gotama. The refuge in dhamma mainly means surrendering to nature's way, which in a sense means forgoing any 'way that is mine'. The more superficial meaning of dhamma is the teachings of Gotama as these are about nature's way, but are not nature's way itself. In this we we have a primary way of taking refuge in 'enlightenment' (whatever that means), and in the way the universe is. Under the Buddhist worldview, the universe is not so much an object named as a noun, but more like an activity described by a verb, so in effect, surrendering to this moment just as it is akin to refuge in dhamma. This is not how the texts state it, but because the written philosophy is not that to which it refers, it is only understood in the way an individual sees it, and it has no 'true meaning'. I discuss the subject by way of inner exploration and apply meaning to that written according to what I 'find out' in actuality, which I suggest is the way to understanding - and it would not be prudent to just adopt what Gem says. Gem has no 'true meanings' apart from those inner knowings, and all other people can only know what teachings mean through their own real lived discovery.


This leads directly to meditation, as meditation is basically the 'inner discovery' we call 'insight'.






Actually, what we think of as Buddhism as a school of textual knowledge is not particularly accurate, because 'Buddha' primarily means the quality of enlightenment. What you imply, or at least what I infer from what you said, is more in the spirit of Buddhism than the volumes of knowledge called 'teachings'. Indeed, the teachings have no meaning at all other than that applied from the 'inner Buddha', as you put it.







' I think in a Buddhist context, the initial 'taking refuge in the Buddha' mostly pertains to a surrender to the enlightenment within, and it does not mean taking refuge in any person such as Gotama '


Different schools/branches have various ideas on what taking refuge means. Some do take refuge in Gautama as a person and their Master, others like Zen take refuge in the Historical Buddha and all enlightened beings in their lineage. One size doesn't fit all.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 28-05-2018, 08:00 AM
Rain95 Rain95 is offline
Suspended
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 901
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sky123
Thoughts are not made from the brain, they pop up from nowhere, well mine do

Well yes that is how we would perceive it, higher awareness people anyway. We are not the brain, which makes thought, so from our perspective they would appear to be popping up from nowhere. That's because we are not the creator of them.

When a single neuron fires, it is an isolated chemical blip. When many of them fire together, they form a thought. The prefrontal cortex part of the brain uses many other areas of the brain to form a thought, each performing different tasks in the process. The brain, with its roughly 85 billion neurons, each with some 15,000 connections to neighboring neurons is staggering in it's complexity.

All of this can be seen by scientists as the brain creates and forms thoughts, though we still have no idea how it is all working. All scientists see is certain areas of the brain become active based on what the person is thinking about, but then say a person is thinking about someone they love, you are talking about 25 billion or so individual neurons in a certain area of the brain doing "something" which is beyond human understanding. All we know is these billions of neurons are "working" like some super computer way more advanced than any a human has made with parallel processing across the entire neuron network. All of this is related to the human animals intelligence.

Modern research now is stating that they have clues that certain areas of the brain are dedicated to different conceptual perspectives and these all work together in the formation of thought. For example one area of the brain asks, is this about me or them? another looks at the causes or results, another works with the concepts of external objects. Whatever intelligence designed the brain is many billions of years more advanced than us.

It's similar to the brains processing that goes on for something as simple as you or me looking at an apple. The visual processing areas of the brain are doing billions of calculations a second to make that apple appear as it does. The question that one may ask from that is why? Aren't we just seeing what's there? Apparently not because if we were merely seeing what was there, the brain would not need to work that hard for us to see it the way we do.

Most people cannot wrap their heads around the idea that they are not the maker of their own thoughts, but it's true. We are so conditioned to think of our thoughts and memory as "us," it is a very difficult delusion to ever get beyond. Cognitive scientists in the last decade or so have discovered that thoughts are created by the brain before we become conscious of them which again shows we (consciousness) had nothing to do with their creation.

Buddha claimed there was no self. He discovered he was not the maker of his thoughts over 5000 years ago. So it's something that can be discovered with enough insights into our own natures. The delusion of people (consciousness) being wholly identified with their thoughts and memory is part of the entire design of this whole masquerade. We are INTENDED to be fooled. It is part of the design. We are intended to believe we are the ego. This too is part of the design. My guess as to the why? is pretty simple. The only way out of this delusion is an increase in awareness, which to me, seem to be the goal of this whole game.

Put consciousness into a human body and merge it with the human brain, design the human life, birth to old age and death, to further complete this "body identity" add in pleasure, sex, and all of that to cause further identification and then the suffering is there to impel one to find the answer... the realization they are not what the think they are...they are not the body, and not the bodies mind.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 28-05-2018, 08:33 AM
sky sky is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 15,533
  sky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain95
Well yes that is how we would perceive it, higher awareness people anyway. We are not the brain, which makes thought, so from our perspective they would appear to be popping up from nowhere. That's because we are not the creator of them.

When a single neuron fires, it is an isolated chemical blip. When many of them fire together, they form a thought. The prefrontal cortex part of the brain uses many other areas of the brain to form a thought, each performing different tasks in the process. The brain, with its roughly 85 billion neurons, each with some 15,000 connections to neighboring neurons is staggering in it's complexity.

All of this can be seen by scientists as the brain creates and forms thoughts, though we still have no idea how it is all working. All scientists see is certain areas of the brain become active based on what the person is thinking about, but then say a person is thinking about someone they love, you are talking about 25 billion or so individual neurons in a certain area of the brain doing "something" which is beyond human understanding. All we know is these billions of neurons are "working" like some super computer way more advanced than any a human has made with parallel processing across the entire neuron network. All of this is related to the human animals intelligence.

Modern research now is stating that they have clues that certain areas of the brain are dedicated to different conceptual perspectives and these all work together in the formation of thought. For example one area of the brain asks, is this about me or them? another looks at the causes or results, another works with the concepts of external objects. Whatever intelligence designed the brain is many billions of years more advanced than us.

It's similar to the brains processing that goes on for something as simple as you or me looking at an apple. The visual processing areas of the brain are doing billions of calculations a second to make that apple appear as it does. The question that one may ask from that is why? Aren't we just seeing what's there? Apparently not because if we were merely seeing what was there, the brain would not need to work that hard for us to see it the way we do.

Most people cannot wrap their heads around the idea that they are not the maker of their own thoughts, but it's true. We are so conditioned to think of our thoughts and memory as "us," it is a very difficult delusion to ever get beyond. Cognitive scientists in the last decade or so have discovered that thoughts are created by the brain before we become conscious of them which again shows we (consciousness) had nothing to do with their creation.

Buddha claimed there was no self. He discovered he was not the maker of his thoughts over 5000 years ago. So it's something that can be discovered with enough insights into our own natures. The delusion of people (consciousness) being wholly identified with their thoughts and memory is part of the entire design of this whole masquerade. We are INTENDED to be fooled. It is part of the design. We are intended to believe we are the ego. This too is part of the design. My guess as to the why? is pretty simple. The only way out of this delusion is an increase in awareness, which to me, seem to be the goal of this whole game.

Put consciousness into a human body and merge it with the human brain, design the human life, birth to old age and death, to further complete this "body identity" add in pleasure, sex, and all of that to cause further identification and then the suffering is there to impel one to find the answer... the realization they are not what the think they are...they are not the body, and not the bodies mind.




Sorry but we are like crossed wires, I am not getting the jist of your post. First you mention a self that existed before and after death and now you quote Buddha as saying there is no self ( which he didn't ). You also said thoughts are made from the brain now you agree that they don't. Not to worry, each to their own.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 28-05-2018, 10:55 AM
Eelco
Posts: n/a
 
Foolishness

With Love
Eelco

Last edited by Eelco : 28-05-2018 at 12:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 28-05-2018, 12:15 PM
sky sky is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 15,533
  sky's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eelco
Foolishness

With Love
Eelco



Why? if I can't get the jist of Rains postings that's the way it is, no point in pretenses.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 28-05-2018, 12:27 PM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,075
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eelco
You may read my posts any way you like.
I will explain, assert, and accuse when need be.


I'm afraid that is unreasonable.


Quote:
As I have in the past, I am repeating myself and so are you.


Insinuations are not rally my thing, because they leave to much room for interpretation.


Be mindful all you want.As for your good name..
You don't need to defend what isn't there on my account.


As you make rules of conversation, using grand words as metta or right speech etc. All I am saying is keep your advices where they belong. Basically anywhere, but the Buddhism place.. As your ideas about what constitutes Buddhism and how we should treat each other here has been violated by you and the way you trespassed your own standards.


I am merely a mirror and reminder of that fact.



I'm gonna stop talking to you now.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 28-05-2018, 01:05 PM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,075
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sky123
' I think in a Buddhist context, the initial 'taking refuge in the Buddha' mostly pertains to a surrender to the enlightenment within, and it does not mean taking refuge in any person such as Gotama '


Different schools/branches have various ideas on what taking refuge means. Some do take refuge in Gautama as a person and their Master, others like Zen take refuge in the Historical Buddha and all enlightened beings in their lineage. One size doesn't fit all.




I'm pretty sure 'Buddha' means the quality of enlightenment across the board just through the literal meaning of the word, and for the sake of this forum where few would take refuge in any formal ceremonial way, it's seems more suitable to refer to something universal than to an icon of a particular religion. People of schools can take refuge in way of their schools, but for near enough everyone on this forum, universal meanings of 'Buddha' and 'dhamma' seem more appropriate.

Hence I try to frame it in a way that anyone would consider, to rest in the enlightenment (which remains undefined) and the way of nature (which isn't exactly known). I think that would have the widest appeal, and it in no way precludes anyone from taking refuge in their preferred sectarian way. Indeed, some may take refuge in Jesus Christ who might be symbolic as the embodiment of enlightenment to them, which is equally valid as the iconic figure of Gotama the Buddha.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 28-05-2018, 01:16 PM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,075
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sky123
' I think in a Buddhist context, the initial 'taking refuge in the Buddha' mostly pertains to a surrender to the enlightenment within, and it does not mean taking refuge in any person such as Gotama '


Different schools/branches have various ideas on what taking refuge means. Some do take refuge in Gautama as a person and their Master, others like Zen take refuge in the Historical Buddha and all enlightened beings in their lineage. One size doesn't fit all.




Oh, and I'll just mention that in my own school it is taught that Gotama said there were many Buddhas before himself and many more to come, which implies a 'lineage' of sorts, and it makes sense to me when I consider how many enlightened ones there are.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 28-05-2018, 01:31 PM
Eelco
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sky123
Why? if I can't get the jist of Rains postings that's the way it is, no point in pretenses.




Sorry sky, this foolishness was pointing to the stuff I wrote in reply to Gem.
I removed it but again it has re-appeared. so you can see what it contained.


Nothing to do with you or rain.


With Love
Eelco
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 01:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums