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.

 

The unborn undying mind of the Buddha

page: 6
34
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by InthekNOwla
... The trick to life is to die before you die. ...

Again, from a Buddhist perspective, you are dying all the time, (a bunch of times every second, if you go back to the original sources), you just don't realize it, in exactly the way that you don't realize you already have a completely clear and whole mind.

So the real trick is to realize that you have already died, a thousand times over. And, lo!, the world is still here and just as it is.




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


Would non-seeking non-grasping mind be the very same mind as the unborn undying mind? It would wouldn't it?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:55 AM
link   
AH even our senses betray us as it takes time for the information to reach our consciousness from our senses.

Hmmm.... how to negate that lag to be in the now.

How is it possible to be totally in the now because of the limitations of awarenesses.

Even discussing or thinking of Zen unsettles me.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Utopian Penguin
Even discussing or thinking of Zen unsettles me.

Good. Then it's helpful. Or maybe not..



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
reply to post by Geladinhu
 


I wish someone would take the time to read this, and comment on it


It's amusing to watch so many missed opportunites.


Zoom. Bleat.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
Would non-seeking non-grasping mind be the very same mind as the unborn undying mind? It would wouldn't it?

I think we are talking about the same thing, yes. I don't really like "unborn undying," since our mind is, philosophically and technically speaking, being born and dying over and over, with our perception of a coherent, durational self being an "illusion," but yeah, I think we mean the same thing.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 

What was that supposed to mean? It was intended to be helpful to people, and it offered a different perspective than that which people normally have in relation to this topic, but it would need to be actually read and considered carefully.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


I respectfully disagree. The philosopher Descartes thought he had found the one fundamental principle when we uttered his famous dictum "I think therefore I am" He had in fact pointed to the disfunction of human kind. He realized that the fact that he was always thinking was undeniable and took it as the one thing that he could know for sure. He equated thinking with being. 300 years later the philosopher Jean Paul Sautes whom some regard as the father of modern philosophy Looked very carefully at Descartes statement and came to the realization that "The consciousness that thinks is not the consciousness that says I AM." He too had not been knowledgeable of the ego so was not able to go beyond. The movie The Matrix is based on these fundamental spiritual teachings. The movie advocates knowing thyself and self realization which is the realization of who you are NOT. THE MIND. We have all heard the saying "You are not your mind." Awakening form the matrix is an analogy for the awakening out of thought. When told of the voice in the head most people respond "What voice?" or angrily deny it which of course IS the voice. If you ask ANYONE you meet or know if they know themselves they will shout YES with great reverence but from the outside looking in we see with great clarity and witness that most do not truly know themselves. As I said before the mind has its own beauty. It is to be used daily and out of necessity but it is merely a tool with which once we are finished we should lay it back on the shelf until needed again. Do you know how to be without your mind? Do you know how to stop thinking? Have you found the OFF switch? NO? Then you are lost in thought and identified with the voice in the head being you. A false you. You can only be one! Well, with that being said, you can OBSERVE THE VOICE. You can listen to it. Well, if you can listen to it then it can't be you. YOU ARE THE ONE DOING THE LISTENING. The observer NOT the thinker. The stillness in the background. This realization is all thats needed for you're awakening. :-)

A Flower For You.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by InthekNOwla]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 

Thanks.

So it would be the mind which rests in the Tao, either at peace or doing in spontaneity.

Would it be fair to call it playful? Humorous? Loving?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Utopian Penguin
AH even our senses betray us as it takes time for the information to reach our consciousness from our senses.

Hmmm.... how to negate that lag to be in the now.

How is it possible to be totally in the now because of the limitations of awarenesses.

Well, Buddhism is inherently a subjective thing. Even if the "now" out there happened 5 milliseconds before we perceive it, we're not interested in it "out there." The "now" we are interested in is the moment that we experience not the now that is, out there, somewhere.


Even discussing or thinking of Zen unsettles me.

The Buddhist view of the mind is pretty foreign to our everyday experience (but pretty dang close to what modern cognitive science is discovering!), so that's not really surprising. I mean, who wants to go ask some teacher for enlightenment, only to be told that there is no "self" that can ask such a question, and there's no such thing as "enlightenment!" One of the things that draws me to Buddhism is that, despite the fact that it is totally foreign and weird and unsettling, it has been around for a long time, which makes me think there is really something to it...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by InthekNOwla
... Then you are lost in thought and identified with the voice in the head being you. A false you. You can only be one! Well, with that being said, you can OBSERVE THE VOICE. You can listen to it. Well, if you can listen to it then it can't be you. YOU ARE THE ONE DOING THE LISTENING. The observer NOT the thinker. The stillness in the background. This realization is all thats needed for you're awakening.


We're saying the same thing, I think, but with different words. As I said above, "mind" is, in Buddhist philosophy, the thing that perceives the voice. The voice is thoughts.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by InthekNOwla
 

Yes, thanks for bring that back to presence for me, all the Buddhism was started to delude me!

I will stick with that distinction (observing consciousness observing mind) for a several years and get that DOWN, before attempting to let go of that final distinction, which is important, to reign in the ego, or what I've called the IT-self mind, the meaning making machine.

Thanks, and thanks for the flower!



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


I absolutely agree. Each moment begins and ends in itself. We have all died hundreds or thousands of times over again but you miss the truth meaning of the statement. To die before you die means to realize and negate ones false sense of self. Im not referring to the physical act of death which is really another form of birth. Birth into the unmanifested. it is a return to oneness with all.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
Are you speaking spontaneity of thought or action ?.
Is true spontaneity even possible ?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


Yes we are. This is the truth. The voice IS thought. You are exactly right my friend.

A Flower For You.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
So it would be the mind which rests in the Tao, either at peace or doing in spontaneity.

Hrm... I'm not familiar enough with Taoism to really answer this. My instinct, though, is to say no: the ungrasping mind is the Tao. But that might be imposing a lot of Buddhism on Taoism where it doesn't belong.


Would it be fair to call it playful? Humorous? Loving?

I repeat, hrm... I'm not sure that the mind is any of those, because it is... the mind, I dunno... Sure, I guess it is those things, but it is also hateful, and a dog, and your mom in exactly the same way that it is playful, humorous, and loving.

Or something...



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   
This is why I love ATS. This discussion is a very good one. I would love to sit in a room with ones so aware and discuss. On ATS this room is not required . We have the screen and are able to discuss. Its times like this I see just how valuable the internet is.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


We're calling the whole mind the thoughts and the voice and are identifying the observer with consciousness and consciousness with the Tao, which is the universal consciousness giving rise to all form.

The most fundamental "I am" of being, but not the one who thinks, the one who HAS thoughts.

This just feels better and easier for me, and hey, whatever works, since this aint about rules or trivialities. Whatever works and that works for me, I can feel it just typing this now.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
I will stick with that distinction (observing consciousness observing mind) for a several years and get that DOWN, before attempting to let go of that final distinction, ...

I'm not sure this is the way to go. How do you watch the clouds without the sky?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by InthekNOwla
I absolutely agree. Each moment begins and ends in itself. We have all died hundreds or thousands of times over again but you miss the truth meaning of the statement. To die before you die means to realize and negate ones false sense of self.

Ya, again, I think we're on the same page with different words. I don't view it as negating ones feelings of false selfhood, it is rather realizing that the self, the false self, has already died thousands of times, and so can't be anything but false.



new topics




 
34
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join