It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mind and Energy

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
This is an extract from a transcript of some teachings on the Tibetan model of the mind, given in 2005 by a very kind lama, Kyabje Gelek Rimpoche.

Before reviewing the text presented here it is recommended that the reader first review the introduction to the material posted here.





















Source : Sem - The Nature of Mind




posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   
Page 50, "natural agricultural product" and a tripping Rinpoche made me chuckle



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Well, thats a great read! Thanks for posting.

Maybe you can check this one out as well:
www.sethlearningcenter.org...

Seth, channeled by Jane Roberts, speaks up whats the nature of
reality, cosnciousness, etc...

Amazing.. changed my view on this "reality" we live in.



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   
I'm glad somebody's reading these things :0

Anyway, in the 'original' document, hosted in the ATS media basket, is the 'unredacted' original text ...



posted on Apr, 7 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to comment by RobertPaulson :
 


Maybe you can check this one out as well:
www.sethlearningcenter.org...

Seth, channeled by Jane Roberts, speaks up whats the nature of
reality, cosnciousness, etc...

Yes, I am aware of these Seth teachings and many others like them. To each his own, I guess. In my case I was fortunate enough to come by some relatively 'uncorrupted' teachings through 'authentic lineage holders' after the Tibetan diaspora ...

Others may not have had this opportunity and so, for them, things like Seth, etc, will have to do, perhaps. I don't really have an opinion on it.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 12:30 AM
link   
I think what I just read means that the mind is not phisical, and the truths that we experience are passed on, actually shaping the soul, which by bhuddist standards is reincarnated forever and any distortions of truth are by nature noticed by the mind and kind of...deleted? so that our next soul isnt "born" with inherent distortions of reality? If im way off here please help me understand.

P.S. This post was so long i feared to read it. But did and im still here so, thanks.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Boredinjail
I think what I just read means that the mind is not phisical, and the truths that we experience are passed on, actually shaping the soul, which by bhuddist standards is reincarnated forever and any distortions of truth are by nature noticed by the mind and kind of...deleted? so that our next soul isnt "born" with inherent distortions of reality? If im way off here please help me understand.

P.S. This post was so long i feared to read it. But did and im still here so, thanks.


Not quite... that is more like hindu thought, from which buddhism originated. Buddhism takes a different approach, because the Buddha denied the existence of a soul or anything that transmigrates between this life and the next. This is probably one of the hardest things to understand in buddhism especially when you have reincarnating lama's and other saints that tell about rebirth. I myself doubt it could be understood without beginning with the basics, the 4 noble truths, meditation practices and moving on to more complicated concepts such as dependent origination, non-violence and not-self. If you had trouble reading the lenghty text on this page, then better prepare yourself for many many hours of reading and even more thinking about what you read and trying to grasp it.

Because I'm not a qualified teacher, just a student I should not try and explain but maybe this excerpt does a little:


Nothing transmigrates from this moment to the next, nothing from one life to another life. This process of continually producing and being produced may best be compared with a wave on the ocean. In the case of a wave there is not the smallest quantity of water that actually travels over the surface of the sea. The wave-structure that seems to hasten over the surface of the water, though creating the appearance of one and the same mass of water, is in reality nothing but a continued rising and falling of ever new masses of water. And the rising and falling is produced by the transmission of force originally generated by wind. Just so the Buddha did not teach that it is an ego-entity, or a soul, that hastens through the ocean of rebirth, but that it is in reality merely a life-wave which, according to its nature and activities, appears here as man, there as animal, and elsewhere as invisible being.


From accesstoinsight



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to comment by Dragonfly79
 

I appreciate your interest in this topic and thank you for your comment.

I am in the process of putting together a reply to Boredinjail's post. Please be patient. I am having some trouble locating a specific text which will prove interesting and informative ( I hope )



Because I'm not a qualified teacher, just a student I should not try and explain but maybe this

Thanks for your honesty


I think we are all 'in the same boat' in this respect.

And why ? Because only when one has attained 'Buddhahood' has one reached the stage of 'no more learning.'

I should address 'right away' another thing you posted -


because the Buddha denied the existence of a soul or anything that transmigrates between this life and the next.

There are many 'schools of buddhism.' The presentation in the OP here is at the 'Prasangika Madhamika' level of the 'Tibetan Mahayana.' This translates, more or less, as the 'mind only' school.

I am not familiar with the 'authority' you cite in your post, Nyanatiloka Mahathera. My impression is that he's a 'south Indian' 'Theravadin.' I am not familiar with the details of any of the texts this author cites in his article.

I can say this however with certainty - Guatama Buddha certainly taught the doctrine of reincarnation. The way that this 'doctrine' has been 'embedded' in the 'Tibetan Mahayana,' which, again, is the viewpoint of this thread's OP, is that what 'incarnates,' and in fact has been doing so since 'beginningless time,' or the 'beginningless beginning,' is something called the 'mindstream.'

This 'mindstream' is the 'entity' which carries the 'imprints' of 'karmas' we have done in the past. And it is this 'mindstream' which 'roughly approximates' the Christian notion of a 'soul.' But, in the context of this discussion it is not the 'soul,' it is the 'mindstream.'

According to this 'model', then, this 'mindstream' carries these 'imprints' of 'past actions' forward into its 'incarnations' as 'potentialities' or 'seeds' which may or may not 'sprout' depending on environmental 'causes and conditions.' Sort of like a 'seed' which may or may not 'sprout' depending on which kind of soil it is planted in, whether or not there is enough water and sunshine, etc ...

Again, I do appreciate your interest and would like to see you 'hang in here' patiently, again, as I do appreciate your interest, while I put together a response to Boredinjail's post, because he has raised an issue which, IMHO, gets at the 'core' of the matter.




posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to comment by Boredinjail
 

Thanks for your interest - I appreciate your comment and will try here to address your question and respond to your comments too.


I think what I just read means that the mind is not phisical

It is not an easy task to take off our 'western headset' and replace it with the 'eastern' one, but this is what must be done to begin to grasp what these lamas are talking about. It takes time and reflection, maybe something 'ideal' for someone who's 'bored in jail.'


We have the 'western' ( Christian ) notion of 'creation,' and this turns out to be 'strangely similar' to the Indian ( Vedic ) notion -



A 'schematic' of how it all 'breaks down' is as follows -


So, 'it all starts' ( after the 'first sound,' that is ... ) with 'prakriti.'


Evolutes of Prakriti

... Prakriti, which can be loosely described as unmanifest, primordial matter (which is subtler than the gross realm of quantum physics). This Prakriti ("matter") is infused with pure consciousness, which is called Purusha. Here, however, we are not just talking about the evolutes of chains of thought and emotions, but also the evolutes of the instruments by which we think and emote. This is taking us to the core of our being.

Source : Himalayan Masters

Prakriti is the 'finest' type of 'matter' there is. In fact it is 'formless.' As prakriti 'devolves' it becomes 'denser and denser' until it finally 'manifests' at the 'physical level' in terms of things we can 'directly experience' with our 'gross senses' like eye, ear, nose, taste, touch ...

According to this model, the 'matter' of which mind is composed is 'formless.' It is much 'finer,' or in the parlance of the 'new agers,' of a much 'higher vibrational level' than the physical matter which the 'scientists' can detect in terms of atoms and molecules and such ...


Now, your next observation is really a 'core issue' in this discussion -


the truths that we experience are passed on, actually shaping the soul

The way this 'model' is 'put together' is that the mind, by it's very 'nature,' merges with whatever it 'percieves.' The mind and the percieved object in a 'material sense' actually become 'one.' This is quite crucial.


And it is precisely by this 'merging' with it's 'object' that these 'imprints,' or 'karmic seeds,' are formed in the midstream.

Hence, your next comment is right in line with the 'model,' -


so that our next soul isnt "born" with inherent distortions of reality

But, doesn't say it 'quite right.'

What incarnates into it's next 'body of karma' is the 'mindstream' carrying with it all these 'imprints' which produce all our 'tendencies.'

These 'imprints' can definately be of both a 'positive' nature and a 'negative' nature.

This is what the 'old books,' at least the ones which have not been 'corrupted,' either accidently or otherwise, do teach.


This post was so long i feared to read it. But did and im still here so, thanks

Thank you, and please say more, if interested. This material is hardly 'easy to get.' But, my own experience is that it's worth the 'effort.'

And also, once one gets past all the 'language barriers,' the 'model' itself is really quite straightforward and logically consistent.




posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Hum... Im forward to the occult teachings because they are logical, somewhat simple and complex at the same time, and the most important thing is: you can see for yourself, no need to believe, you just need to learn how to project your conscience into things (matter) or the non-physical planes (astral and the deeper realms).

The soul wants us to find her (dreams, ringing in ears, daydream thoughts, ideoretinal lights, telekinetic influence and manipulation).

I see the science/mystic duality cycle as benefical to reach the equiibrium of knowledge, so proceed with caution when diving into tibetan and far out beleif systems that in the end could mean social transformation of a group, not self and individual spirituality.

[]´s
RP



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to comment by Constant Gardener
 


... far out beleif systems ...


Of course, 'far out,' as you put it, is a 'relative' thing, now isn't it ?

Far out 'with respect to' what ?

For me, when I read your comment, 'far out belief system,' the first thing which 'popped into' my mind was good old western 'science.'

But, of course, that's just me.


As always, it is never wrong to 'check out things for oneself' to see if one either 'agrees' or not. Unless, that is, one might find themselves 'embedded' in typical human communities which 'tend to frown on' those who prefer grazing at the 'edges of the herd,' just so they might get an idea, from time to time, about what's 'new on the outside,' or even, if theyre lucky, find something 'tasty for lunch,' which hasn't yet been 'trampled on' or 'otherwise polluted' ...

Of course, on the other hand, without those 'fringe dwellers', the 'herd' would never ever learn anything new, now would they ?

Of course, you may argue, and quite justifiably so I might add, that 'the herd isnt supposed to learn anything new -- makes them too hard to manage.

In which case I'd have to agree wholeheartedly !



[edit on 8-4-2009 by visible_villain]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Ok, lets get right on track...

The "uni_verse" is vertical ascension and travel of the soul.

We travel as earth, water, fire, air, sound, perception, reflexion, ethereal, astral, mind, healing, karma and of course "all that is".

As human beings, we receive the gift of "wheels of light", or chakras, as we rise up to the energy to transcend the physical.

Let me repeat: The "uni_verse" is vertical ascension and travel of the soul.

The "multi_verse" is the infinital horizontal planes of the physical needed to the soul to understand in karma plane what is the consequences of all actions, of all futures of all lives... all the "what ifs"... and decides wich lessons are not learned in its "uni" path.

Back on track...

When I mean "far out", is those teachings that specify A LOT things that specifically MERGE with the culture of a tribe or even nation... and thats a way to manipulate behaviour and, what the hell, why not social control..

My point is: the understanding of how the UNI_VERSE is somewhat straight forward!

We get a ride in our "vehicle" every night(dreams), but we see only through OUR "windshields"... when you achieve the understanding that you can drive the vehicle (lucid dream) or go even more by simple opening the door to see what is the real world of the soul (astral projection), you solved the question of who you are and the purpose of existence!

When I say 'far out' - means that there is a lot of difficult teachings that persuade you off your own "car", so to say...

Stay simple.
Stay true to yourself.

If one needs 100 pages to tell you the spiritual version of "the sky is blue", hes on ego masturbation (if theres such a thing).

Just to close this
Most of what i´ve been through words cannot explain... writting is a very poor medium that only works in the psysical world to waking consciences trade tips that coveys only a fraction of the creativity of the soul, the inner ego.

Wow.. my crown chakra is spinning alot today..

[]´s
RP



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to comment by Constant Gardener
 


Ok, lets get right on track...


I've already mentioned here this is a thread about the 'Tibetan model of mind.' If you'd like to discuss Seth, channeling, astral travel, or other 'occult parlor tricks,' that's fine too, just start your own thread and, as they say, 'have a ball !' - with my blessings, as well.

Good luck on your 'travels'



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by visible_villain
I can say this however with certainty - Guatama Buddha certainly taught the doctrine of reincarnation.


Unless you are over 2500 years of age and with perfect memory, or you are completely awake, there is no way to verify which teachings are corrupt and which are not. Every writing can be altered, spoken teachings can be distorted, these are all possibilities with no way of 100% verification. The Buddha might even be a complete fabrication, something invented by intelligent people who simply disagreed with Hindu teachings.

What do you think of the Tibetan buddhist way of debating the issues you post here? I may not be very good at it but certainly up for it as a learning experience.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by visible_villain
 


Excellent post.

You have given me a lot to digest, and it will probably be many days before I grasp all that is here.

Well done





posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to comment by Dragonfly79
 

First of all, I appreciate your interest in the topic at hand, and I will respond now to your comment, which is appreciated as well.


To begin -


... there is no way to verify which teachings are corrupt and which are not.

The way to verify is by 'direct experience.' These teaching are all 'practice oriented,' and thus through our own practice we can 'validate' whether or not they are true.


The Buddha might even be a complete fabrication

It is generally agreed among scholars that Guatama Buddha was an actual historic person -


Gautama Buddha

Siddhārtha Gautama (Sanskrit; Pali: Siddhattha Gotama) was a spiritual teacher in the northern region of the Indian subcontinent who founded Buddhism. He is generally seen by Buddhists as the Supreme Buddha (Sammāsambuddha) of our age. The time of his birth and death are uncertain: most early 20th-century historians date his lifetime from c. 563 BCE to 483 BCE; more recently, however, at a specialist symposium on this question, the majority of those scholars who presented definite opinions gave dates within 20 years either side of 400 BCE for the Buddha's death, with others supporting earlier or later dates.

Source : Wikipedia

Finally -


The Buddha might even be a complete fabrication, something invented by intelligent people who simply disagreed with Hindu teachings.

The Hindu teachings came after Buddhism. The 'authenticity' of Guatama Buddha's life was established already by the time the Hindu faith gained 'supremacy' over Buddhism in India.

Hopefully readers can 'eventually' get down to the 'meat' of the OP's topic, which is the 'Tibetan model of Mind.'

It is quite a sophisticated one, which IMHO is far richer and more 'realistic' than the 'western model.'

Thanks for comment.



posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to comment by Dragonfly79
 

Even though, 'strictly speaking' it is 'off topic', I am thinking it might 'not hurt' to address your question as well -


What do you think of the Tibetan buddhist way of debating the issues you post here?

The topic of 'Tibetan debate' is a very rich field of study, and one of which I personally have only 'scratched the surface.'

Consider that millions of 'practicioners' over a span of more than a thousand years ( 40+ human generations ) have 'refined' the 'logical consistency' of the tenets of their varous 'schools' to a point of very high 'perfection.'

By now it's all 'very tight.'

As an example, the way the 'mind only' school 'characterizes' the 'ultimate bliss-void nature' is by a 'construction' of 'negatives,' as follows -


Neither does it 'exist' nor does it 'not exist,' nor does it 'exist and not exist,' and 'neither does it exist and not exist.'

The reason such a 'construction' is made in terms of 'negatives' as illustrated is that the 'actuality' of the 'supreme bliss-void nature' is 'inconcievable' to the human mind. Hence, the 'construction' 'points' to what 'it is' by 'asserting' what it 'is not.'

I indulge in this 'digression' from the OP's topic because Buddhist debate is a highly refined 'art' and certainly worthy of discussion, but it is 'off topic' with respect to this thread.

I would be happy to see somebody initiate such a discussion, and maybe even I will do it at some point in the future if 'interest' persists.




posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by visible_villain

Thanks for comment.


You're welcome



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join