Gautama Siddhartha

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Gem

In Buddhist philosophy consciousness arises together with the senses and what is sensed, hence there is a thing all about 'contact' between consciousness, the senses and the sensed which are interdependent in each other.

Pantanjali says virtually the same thing ... that Asmita (little I-am-ness) and Avidya (ignorance) arise simultaneously. That ignorance leads to attractions and repulsions resulting in clinging to the illusionary separatist life.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 443 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by sentient

The Jhana-way to *shift* is much more gradual me thinks

When I met with Buddhist monks in Hangzhou, China, we had a discussion of "gradual enlightenment" versus "sudden enlightenment".

For your information, it is my understanding now that the "sudden enlightenment" school alone survived the debates on that subject.

Having said that, groundwork and effort is needed as the metaphorical chicken keeps pecking away at the shell until there is a weak point and the mother chicken pecks at the point from the other side ... and, suddenly, there is a breakthrough.

[sentient]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

I prefer, Spirit is in everything or something like that..

You are right, that words it correctly ...
Thank you.

*

[sentient]

Originally Posted by Gem

In Buddhist philosophy consciousness arises together with the senses and what is sensed, hence there is a thing all about 'contact' between consciousness, the senses and the sensed which are interdependent in each other.

¿Qué?

*

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

Pantanjali says virtually the same thing ... that Asmita (little I-am-ness) and Avidya (ignorance) arise simultaneously. That ignorance leads to attractions and repulsions resulting in clinging to the illusionary separatist life.

Thank you for the 'translation' ...

*

[sentient]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

:
Having said that, groundwork and effort is needed as the metaphorical chicken keeps pecking away at the shell until there is a weak point and the mother chicken pecks at the point from the other side ... and, suddenly, there is a breakthrough.

That is a lovely story & true too

*

Originally Posted by sky123

Didn't The Buddha ' Think a lot ' ?.

I was defining "thinking" in that quote as the projection of, and recitation of, conceptually based and acquired knowledge. Intellectual understanding and the processes and functions that go with that.

If you have any interest in this topic you can find more here on this buddhist web site and many other places:

Intellectual Understanding versus Intuitive Understanding

https://studybuddhism.com/en/advance...l-vs-intuitive

Knowledge and understanding can flow in a myriad of ways. For example, I can read a book about how to fish, or I can have someone show me, or I can observe or watch someone fishing, or I could have figured it all out on my own in the simple observation of there are fish in that water and maybe the circumstances were I needed them for food. As the proverb says, "Necessity is the mother of invention."

A desire to be free from a certain way of being or a desire to have a certain way of being is that necessity that leads to discovery and self inquiry. I would say "how much" thought was present in a buddha is not the question, as thought is merely a symbolic or language based conceptual representation of knowledge. The question would be, what is the relationship between a buddha's conscious awareness and symbolic or conceptual forms of knowledge?

But then who has an interest in any of this lol. No one I know. I also have no interest in it. My interest is freedom in the now. Communion with spirit which is everywhere and in everything. Recitation of conceptual knowledge does not always represent attachment to it. That depends on where the attention primarily dwells or functions from. In what house. The conceptual or the actual.

[pixiedust]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

For your information, it is my understanding now that the "sudden enlightenment" school alone survived the debates on that subject.

Not sure that's true, SW (agree with everything else!)

[pixiedust]

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

An intellectual to me means someone always in their ideas, and someone in love with their ideas. Someone who thinks a lot.

This is how I see you. And then I would agree that the Buddha wasn't an intellectual, but he was very skilled, measured and wise in how he taught. He had the intelligence and education, as well as e-motional intelligence to relate to those he spoke with. He also had the most important quality of all in this field - all the way through, genuine, deep realization.

[pixiedust]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 428 EXCERPT:
That is precisely the sign of a masterful teacher ... one who realizes that one shoe does not fit all.

Yes.............. Also everyone's problems and talents are different

[sentient]

Originally Posted by AbodhiSky

My interest is freedom in the now.
A desire to be free from a certain way of being or a desire to have a certain way of being …….
The question would be, what is the relationship between a buddha's conscious awareness and symbolic or conceptual forms of knowledge?
That depends on where the attention primarily dwells or functions from. In what house. The conceptual or the actual.

A sketch …

The practice of non-thought in itself is no *awareness shift* nor ‘orientational shift’.
Not to say, that this practice wouldn’t be good and not to say that it couldn’t potentially lead to “awakening”. Depending on what insights the (non-thought/thought) practice produces, which in turn, like the ‘Ariadne's thread’ could create the path to “freedom”.

The problem with ‘either-or logic’ is that if one thinks the negation of thinking is the ‘be all and end all’ of practices and “freedom” already … this might only reinforce the ego (as that which negates) ….. hence preventing the freedom one sought in the first place.

*