Giving up on enlightenment

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

This:
Awareness of concepts is not at issue, the self-identification with a particular concept is. With such self-identification, a particular concept is loved. With correct view, nothing is known as actually separate.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

This (which is also That):
Attachment to a concept for the sake of or because of does not require a self to be present. My argument is with the popular view of 'enlightenment' (a view I believe you have) as being that of going beyond the necessity of detachment from the concept of an inherent self to belief that one must/can detach themselves from their concepts (things). The deluded and psychologically damaging belief that one can be I am (implied or stated) without also being That.

You are clearly attached to dependently originated bliss, to your love for the Buddha, and yet, in the same breath, declare yourself to be completely detached. Because of, for the sake of, attachment is an absolute for consciousness.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Liken the mind to the candle flame and its mental factors to the rays of that flame.
bliss is generated.
anything to report?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

Bliss is generated as something independent of dependent origination? This is what happens when reasoning goes out the window. But not to worry, it's in the wings waiting for your awakening.
TheImmanent
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by TheImmanent »

movingalways wrote:Bliss is generated as something independent of dependent origination? This is what happens when reasoning goes out the window. But not to worry, it's in the wings waiting for your awakening.
Relations do not originate. The fact that concepts seem to appear and vanish to you is because they relate, i.e., are defined in relation to each other, whereby they are assigned in space and time like the conceptual self. The belief that they originate is the belief that they are actually separate things, and that the self is a separate thing that originates.

There is nothing but consciousness, which is infinite. Even a contrary idea is not separate. With correct view in the conceptual self, the bliss that is everywhere immanent is unobscured.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

TheImmanent wrote:
movingalways wrote:Bliss is generated as something independent of dependent origination? This is what happens when reasoning goes out the window. But not to worry, it's in the wings waiting for your awakening.
Relations do not originate. The fact that concepts seem to appear and vanish to you is because they relate, i.e., are defined in relation to each other, whereby they are assigned in space and time like the conceptual self. The belief that they originate is the belief that they are actually separate things, and that the self is a separate thing that originates.

There is nothing but consciousness, which is infinite. Even a contrary idea is not separate. With correct view in the conceptual self, the bliss that is everywhere immanent is unobscured.
And how does one see or know of the unobscured immanent everywhere bliss if they are totally and completely, 100% immersed in its immanent omnipresence? As Leonard Cohen so wisely points out in his song "Anthem", "there is a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in." Transcendence and immanence are conjoined twins of consciousness. Can't have one without the other.

If one is in bliss, why would contrary even arise?
TheImmanent
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by TheImmanent »

movingalways wrote:
TheImmanent wrote:
movingalways wrote:Bliss is generated as something independent of dependent origination? This is what happens when reasoning goes out the window. But not to worry, it's in the wings waiting for your awakening.
Relations do not originate. The fact that concepts seem to appear and vanish to you is because they relate, i.e., are defined in relation to each other, whereby they are assigned in space and time like the conceptual self. The belief that they originate is the belief that they are actually separate things, and that the self is a separate thing that originates.

There is nothing but consciousness, which is infinite. Even a contrary idea is not separate. With correct view in the conceptual self, the bliss that is everywhere immanent is unobscured.
And how does one see or know of the unobscured immanent everywhere bliss if they are totally and completely, 100% immersed in its immanent omnipresence?
Since there is no actual separation, your consciousness is in essence the same as the infinite. All difference is conceptual.

If one is in bliss, why would contrary even arise?
Consciousness is infinite. This means that there are infinite concepts of beings of varying degrees of enlightenment.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

Immanent, I don't know if you are familiar with Buddhist teachings, but in the Jhana sutta, consciousness of bliss is described as being a chosen object of attention as a part of the development of right concentration. Which means it is not THE (default) essence of consciousness. According to this sutta, it is not until one has passed through all four jhanas, which means passing through bliss and passing through equanimity that he or she attains to mastery of Jhana, in which case:

"He thinks any thought he wants to think, and doesn't think any thought he doesn't want to think. He wills any resolve he wants to will, and doesn't will any resolve he doesn't want to will. He has attained mastery of the mind with regard to the pathways of thought.

"He attains — whenever he wants, without strain, without difficulty — the four jhanas that are heightened mental states, pleasant abidings in the here-&-now.

"With the ending of mental fermentations — he remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having directly known & realized them for himself right in the here-&-now." Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dham ... jhana.html

Note that even at this level of wisdom, beyond bliss, beyond equanimity, one remains bound to discernment-release.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Bliss is generated as something independent of dependent origination? This is what happens when reasoning goes out the window. But not to worry, it's in the wings waiting for your awakening.
= (equals)
Bliss is generated as something independent of dependent origination? This is what happens when reasoning goes out the window. But not to worry, it's in the wings waiting for your awakening


Bliss.
TheImmanent
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by TheImmanent »

movingalways wrote:Immanent, I don't know if you are familiar with Buddhist teachings, but in the Jhana sutta, consciousness of bliss is described as being a chosen object of attention as a part of the development of right concentration. Which means it is not THE (default) essence of consciousness. According to this sutta, it is not until one has passed through all four jhanas, which means passing through bliss and passing through equanimity that he or she attains to mastery of Jhana, in which case:

"He thinks any thought he wants to think, and doesn't think any thought he doesn't want to think. He wills any resolve he wants to will, and doesn't will any resolve he doesn't want to will. He has attained mastery of the mind with regard to the pathways of thought.

"He attains — whenever he wants, without strain, without difficulty — the four jhanas that are heightened mental states, pleasant abidings in the here-&-now.

"With the ending of mental fermentations — he remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having directly known & realized them for himself right in the here-&-now." Source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dham ... jhana.html

Note that even at this level of wisdom, beyond bliss, beyond equanimity, one remains bound to discernment-release.

Anything can be conceptually separated to be meditated on. When one is free from desire for bliss, there is bliss.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Anything can be conceptually separated to be meditated on. When one is free from desire for bliss, there is bliss.
thus generated.

Pam,
The Buddha's teachings are 'vehicle'.
Baby you can drive my car!
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis, TheImmanent, you assume that everyone desires bliss. I have never had that desire, therefore, bliss is not generating my consciousness. Your telling me it is so does not make it so.

Why do you or did you desire bliss?
TheImmanent
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by TheImmanent »

movingalways wrote:Dennis, TheImmanent, you assume that everyone desires bliss. I have never had that desire, therefore, bliss is not generating my consciousness. Your telling me it is so does not make it so.

Why do you or did you desire bliss?
The pursuit of happiness is always generated when the conceptual self is taken for actual. The conception of self and the desire for its fulfillment are the same.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

Even if what you say is true about the search for happiness being the effect of taking the conceptual self as actual, once it is known not to be the actual, why would happiness, in this case, in the form of bliss be the outcome? Logic dictates that the contrasted outcome would happen, that once wisdom arrives, that happiness would cease to become the object of one's vision.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Logic dictates,
OK.
take a letter Maria.

this ceases, that ceases.
this arises, that arises.

in order to for the sake of
vehicle
Last edited by Dennis Mahar on Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
TheImmanent
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by TheImmanent »

movingalways wrote:Even if what you say is true about the search for happiness being the effect of taking the conceptual self as actual, once it is known not to be the actual, why would happiness, in this case, in the form of bliss be the outcome? Logic dictates that the contrasted outcome would happen, that once wisdom arrives, that happiness would cease to become the object of one's vision.
Because that which is and that which is fulfilled is the same.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis Mahar wrote:Logic dictates,
OK.
take a letter Maria.

this ceases, that ceases.
this arises, that arises.

in order to for the sake of
vehicle
Yep, but not always bliss.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Yep, but not always bliss.
Bliss is generated.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

TheImmanent wrote:
movingalways wrote:Even if what you say is true about the search for happiness being the effect of taking the conceptual self as actual, once it is known not to be the actual, why would happiness, in this case, in the form of bliss be the outcome? Logic dictates that the contrasted outcome would happen, that once wisdom arrives, that happiness would cease to become the object of one's vision.
Because that which is and that which is fulfilled is the same.
Huh?

Let's try another pathway. I have never desired bliss or happiness. To discover the why of suffering, how consciousness works, the source of love, the source of hate, what is real and what is not, yes, these things I desired, but not bliss or happiness. Do I experience bliss and joy? Sometimes. Do I feel a sense of lack because of my "sometimes bliss and joy?" Definitely not.

If you and Dennis desire(d) bliss and have found the object of your desire, hey, bless you, but to project it as the absolute feeling 'state' or mood of ultimate reality, well, that's just wrong.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis Mahar wrote:
Yep, but not always bliss.
Bliss is generated.
For you. Not for me. How hard is this for you to grasp?
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by Dennis Mahar »

bliss is generated.

you're not enrolled, that's all.

Gazing upon.
TheImmanent
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:46 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by TheImmanent »

movingalways wrote:
TheImmanent wrote:
movingalways wrote:Even if what you say is true about the search for happiness being the effect of taking the conceptual self as actual, once it is known not to be the actual, why would happiness, in this case, in the form of bliss be the outcome? Logic dictates that the contrasted outcome would happen, that once wisdom arrives, that happiness would cease to become the object of one's vision.
Because that which is and that which is fulfilled is the same.
Huh?

Let's try another pathway. I have never desired bliss or happiness. To discover the why of suffering, how consciousness works, the source of love, the source of hate, what is real and what is not, yes, these things I desired, but not bliss or happiness. Do I experience bliss and joy? Sometimes. Do I feel a sense of lack because of my "sometimes bliss and joy?" Definitely not.

If you and Dennis desire(d) bliss and have found the object of your desire, hey, bless you, but to project it as the absolute feeling 'state' or mood of ultimate reality, well, that's just wrong.
You are driven on a search for fulfillment. Fulfilling oneself affects the mind with happiness. When the conceptual self is taken for actual, fulfillment comes in many different forms which are as arbitrary as the form of the conceptual self.

But when the conceptual self is known to be conceptual, what remains is actual, i.e., being and being fulfilled is the same thing. For the lack of the conceptual self was nothing but a misconception of what the conceptual self is.

Bliss is only an object of desire if the conceptual self is conceived as actual. Without this misconception, there is not even the conception of someone who attains, other than as a concept. Consciousness remains as it is, in which expression it knows bliss, due to its inevitable fulfillment of what it is.
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

MY,MY,MY wrote:
TheImmanent wrote: You identify with a self-conception, which is just an idea and thus cannot pin you down. The identification with a particular self-conception limits the experience of love, it does not create it. While your self-conception may be the conception of a virtuous and noble self, it is not the transcendence of conditions you speak of — transcendence of conditions is to not identify consciousness with a particular idea.
^ What he said
SeekerOfWisdom
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by SeekerOfWisdom »

Dennis Mahar wrote: do you have thoughts or do thoughts have you?
do you have feels or do feels have you?

That's a good one.

Pam seems to think you're implying that if you break your leg and call the ambulance that's delusional.

"Enlightenment" misleads by implying some great difference, imagining the "enlightened" would just lay there and die or not feel any pain or some other bullshit.

If you imagine a God in the clouds, that's not delusional. If you imagine Thor casting the lightning bolts outside, that's not delusional. If you imagine a thousand tiny circles and think that represents atoms, that's not delusional.

It becomes "delusional" when you are attached/clinging to all of these things, and believe them to be true, you start praying to God, you start spouting bullshit and pretend it's knowledge.

We're all experiencing the broken leg, the imagination of a god in the clouds, etc
but
do you have thoughts or do thoughts have you?
do you have feels or do feels have you?


Even to believe "delusional" is anything but inherently meaningless would be "the thoughts having you". The same with "enlightenment".
User avatar
ardy
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:44 am

Re: Giving up on enlightenment

Post by ardy »

movingalways wrote:
Dennis Mahar wrote:
Yep, but not always bliss.
Bliss is generated.
For you. Not for me. How hard is this for you to grasp?
Movingalways: My experience of this bliss is that you have no choice. It just comes as part of the spiritual search combined with meditation. If it does not happen to you well that's OK this is not a yellow brick road. I suspect that the bliss is part of the delusion of the road and not the end of it. Not sure about this, just an idea based on my own experience of it.

Keeping a don't know mind is essential.
Locked