Growing bored of constant "spiritual conversation" - is it normal?

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

Thank you my friend. Whilst reading that, all I could think about was the symbolic meaning of the Trishula.

Yes, I understand about focusing more upon the Aum and not on the Panchakshara itself.

I'm also trying to get my head around that shloka from Mandukya Upanishad, but as close as I can get it, it's all about perception and how things are, whether we realise it or not. Where I get stuck is somewhere between the immanent and the transcendent.

Not only this, but I was almost totally consumed by my own energy last night and it felt like I had reached the end of this life. I was burning from the inside out and it was hard to breathe and my heart stopped a few times. At first I was fighting it - I want to live! but after that I realised I had no choice but to give in to it, yet I also know I don't have much time left now.

If I'm not mistaken, Shankaracharya stated that the Mandukya Upanishad alone was sufficient for transcendence and "enlightenment". Which particular shloka from that Upanishad is presenting difficulties for you ?

In the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, it compares the process of going to sleep to the process of dying. In a way, it's almost a more detailed Mandukya Upanishad.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

If I'm not mistaken, Shankaracharya stated that the Mandukya Upanishad alone was sufficient for transcendence and "enlightenment". Which particular shloka from that Upanishad is presenting difficulties for you ?

In the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, it compares the process of going to sleep to the process of dying. In a way, it's almost a more detailed Mandukya Upanishad.

In general, what you said previously about the dream state vs reality (which is also a 'dream state'):

(An analogy can be made to conscious sleep, as indicated in the Mandukya Upanishad, where one can shift one's attention from the dream-object-manifestations to the dreamer in a way somewhat consistent with lucid dreaming but not exactly.) One is consequently no longer bound to the form, and thus one can break the Rudra Granthi knot without giving up the manifestation of Shiva.

However, to be more specific about it:

अद्वैतं परमार्थो हि द्वैतं तद्भेद उच्यते ।
तेषाम् उभयथा द्वैतं तेनायं न विरुद्ध्यते ॥ १८ ॥

advaitaṃ paramārtho hi dvaitaṃ tadbheda ucyate |
teṣām ubhayathā dvaitaṃ tenāyaṃ na viruddhyate || 18 ||

As non-duality is the ultimate Reality, therefore duality is said to be its effect (Kārya or Bheda). The dualists perceive duality either way (i.e., both in the Absolute and in the phenomena). Therefore the non-dual position does not conflict with the dualist’s position.

- Mandukya Upanishad 3:18

I used to be a follower of Shankaracharya, but not anymore. How can I ever reconcile Atma Shatakam with either Soundarya Lahari or Kalabhairavashtakam?

Yes, I have read the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, but prefer the Mahanirvanatantra much more.

Aum Namah Shivaya

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

In general, what you said previously about the dream state vs reality (which is also a 'dream state'):


However, to be more specific about it:

अद्वैतं परमार्थो हि द्वैतं तद्भेद उच्यते ।
तेषाम् उभयथा द्वैतं तेनायं न विरुद्ध्यते ॥ १८ ॥

advaitaṃ paramārtho hi dvaitaṃ tadbheda ucyate |
teṣām ubhayathā dvaitaṃ tenāyaṃ na viruddhyate || 18 ||

As non-duality is the ultimate Reality, therefore duality is said to be its effect (Kārya or Bheda). The dualists perceive duality either way (i.e., both in the Absolute and in the phenomena). Therefore the non-dual position does not conflict with the dualist’s position.

- Mandukya Upanishad 3:18

I used to be a follower of Shankaracharya, but not anymore. How can I ever reconcile Atma Shatakam with either Soundarya Lahari or Kalabhairavashtakam?

Yes, I have read the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, but prefer the Mahanirvanatantra much more.

Aum Namah Shivaya

LOL - you think way too much for your own good! Just keep loving me as I love you, that will untie the knot. There's a good girl.

[Tobi]

No you don't need constant 'spiritual' conversation. Live your life mindfully and heart-fully and carry on being your 'path'. You can do that anywhere, with any situation.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

As non-duality is the ultimate Reality, therefore duality is said to be its effect (Kārya or Bheda). The dualists perceive duality either way (i.e., both in the Absolute and in the phenomena). Therefore the non-dual position does not conflict with the dualist’s position.

- Mandukya Upanishad 3:18

Aum Namah Shivaya

I'm not sure where that passage comes from as it's not in the Mandukya Upanishad version that I have.

In any case, once one can abide more and more continuously in pure thought-free awareness, the concepts of duality and non-duality clearly do not even arise while simultaneously one is unequivocally aware of the inter-connectedness of all.

I used to get engaged in intellectual spiritual conversations until I realized that, when one cuts off thinking, one soars like an eagle into the metaphorical sky of consciousness, intuitively attunes to the "Big Picture", and surrenders to that which lies beyond thoughts and concepts. That guides me unerringly moment-to-moment whereas the little self-created separatist ego was very very limited.

I've offered the little that I can intellectually, and that's all I can say. I can offer no more on these points. Good luck in breaking the Rudra Granthi knot.

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Tobi

No you don't need constant 'spiritual' conversation. Live your life mindfully and heart-fully and carry on being your 'path'. You can do that anywhere, with any situation.

It has been said that animals live "mindfully" (in the moment). Could you elaborate on "live your life mindfully and heart-fully". The words sound conventionally nice, but I'd like to hear more.

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

I'm not sure where that passage comes from as it's not in the Mandukya Upanishad version that I have.

In any case, once one can abide more and more continuously in pure thought-free awareness, the concepts of duality and non-duality do not even arise while simultaneously one is unequivocally aware of the inter-connectedness of all.

I used to get engaged in intellectual spiritual conversations until I realized that, when one cuts off thinking, one soars like an eagle into the metaphorical sky of consciousness, intuitively attunes to the "Big Picture", and surrenders to that which lies beyond thoughts and concepts. That guides me unerringly moment-to-moment whereas the little self-created separatist ego was very very limited.

I've offered the little that I can intellectually, and that's all I can say. I can offer no more on these points. Good luck in breaking the Rudra Granthi knot.

Thank you my friend. Your wisdom and insight has been much appreciated and has helped me facilitate my spiritual growth.

I understand it now and working towards my own resolution. I just found this:
http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...2&postcount=41

...but for everything else, there's this:


AUM Namah Shivaya

[Shivani Devi]

Oh, I also just found out, that verse is taken from Gaudapada's Karika on Mandukya Upanishad - which I have, not the Upanishad itself. All apologies.

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by Tobi

No you don't need constant 'spiritual' conversation. Live your life mindfully and heart-fully and carry on being your 'path'. You can do that anywhere, with any situation.

Yeah same as with those who say old age is not for sissy's and then we remmeber well whats the alternative.

I think there for many there comes a time, to say this kind of life is not worth it and they either move on or they stop dead in their tracks.

Untill we leave the path of life, were on it for life, irrespective of mindfulness or whatever else we think along the way.

Spirit craves spirit, yet the spirit has limits and each of us have differrent set of limits, at differrent times.

Breath deep{ in-spire-ation } hold it{ pause } breath out. That and think good thoughts are the basics of mindfulness that is sometimes full of mindful thoughts and often forgets these two basics.

It is hard to get on the energy top go to the party, but once involved most of have a good time and may even twist and shout :--D

:-OM or is it oh hum, or is AUM. The AUM leaves are falling, look at the red gold and so forth. Sing along with Mitch or not.

And the beat goes on, ladee-dadee-dah, ladee-dadee-do. Drums keep pound rythems to the brain. Yeah but its 2AM will somebody please go tell them to quiet down. :--)(

r6

[Jyotir]

Originally Posted by Alex-The-Iceman

When I first had my spiritual awakening, I would talk about spirituality a lot. These ideas and experiences were all so new, I wanted to talk about it all the time.

However, as I have grown on my journey, I find myself getting tired of having "spiritual conversations" all the time. I want to just talk about whatever comes up naturally in conversation, whether it is joking and lighthearted, or more introspective.

I feel a desire to absorb the beauty of people enjoying connecting with each other, not constant "nature of the universe" conversation - I feel there's a time and place.

I know a girl who is newly awakening, and every time I see her we talk about spirituality the majority of the time. I enjoy it, but I find myself reaching a point where I start thinking "ok, can we talk about something else now?". It's actually making me start to think: "maybe having a very spiritual partner isn't for me"...

Has anyone else experienced this?

Hi Alex,

Real spirituality is and should be constantly new and providing new experiences in the moment because each moment is an opportunity to live life spiritually.

Human beings are social. There is a need and benefit in sharing and communicating about all experience, so spirituality is no different.
Therefore, 'spiritual talk' can be, and is valid and useful when encouraging, informational, inspiring, positively supportive, etc.

Like interest attracts like participation.
Its why there are spiritual groups, ashrams, and spiritual discussion web-sites. It's human culture.
But just like with the mundane world, talk can be 'cheap' as the saying goes - meaning: theory isn't practice.
At some point, talking isn't the same as doing.

If spirituality means talking all the time, to the exclusion of meaningful practice - and this needs to be intuitively determined by each individual - - then the practice/sadhana needs to be reevaluated. It's why people get bored or frustrated here at SF and take a break for a few days, weeks, or months. Often the talk isn't even inspiring, like we see here, a kind of spiritual Orwellian dialogue of doubt, empty skepticism, depression, etc., i.e.: "There is no God", "ego is good", "I need to experience my dark side", "your path is wrong", "life is hopeless", "spirituality necessarily means feeling superior", "there is no spirituality" etc., etc.

If it isn't inspiring; if it isn't progressive; if it becomes tedious; if it is antithetical, unconstructive, unproductive, fruitless intellectual debate - when to divert attention to more meaningful practice is part of the general practice to learn discernment: when to enter, continue, or withdraw from ANY activity...significantly, according to spiritual orientation.

It's just like musicians: you can't be jamming all the time.

Just be practical, as determined by the spiritual orientation.

~ J