Spirituality & Becoming What We Aren’t.

reply to post by mysticnoon

In mystic teachings, the mind is only considered the enemy if the thoughts lead to desires and actions which undermine our wellbeing and our equipoise. Through the practice of meditation and mindfulness, the thoughts are harnessed in such a way that they no longer pose a threat, and the self slowly learns to discipline the mind so that it does not run rampant and disturb the delicate balance on the tightrope of life.

I think you're right, although you put it more delicately and diplomatically than I would.

Meditation, in its eastern philosophical sense, does have its health benefits, no question. I, to this day, practice breathing exercises. It is only the "think of nothing" aspect of eastern meditation I do without, the aspect that makes meditation out to be a tool of "spirituality". I think teaching oneself not to think is an abortion of the mind and an injustice to the self. To practice housecleaning of the mind, one needs to address thoughts, destroy them, be rid of them, create anew rather than turn and look the other way or sweep them under a carpet.

ctually, I think it may be precisely because I am trying to follow a spiritual path that I have come to realize that I have barely a spiritual bone in my body. In the beginning, I liked to regard myself as "spiritual", but as time went on, it became obvious to me that I was merely deluding myself.

This sounds like my path. However I've concluded, despite our spiritual failures—at least something the spiritual preachers would claim are failures because we are somehow not spiritual enough—are actually victories. It forces us to create our own spirituality rather than becoming an advocate for someone else's.

Spirituality didn't start with Jesus or Buddha or some monk sitting on a floor. It started with life and living, and thinking about life and living. Even scientific inquiry is a form of spirituality. It is there for everyone despite what the preachers try to say.

I enjoy your thinking mystic.

reply to post by CuriousAchilles

No. I just don't have the energy or desire to bang my head against a brick wall. You're entitled to your opinions, however much I disagree with them, and I have better things to do with my time than try to convince you otherwise.

I can appreciate that. I guess it's my fault I didn't buckle under the weight of your arguments. I apologize.

There is an obvious attempt against the OP written and signed by yourself. You did try to convince me otherwise, (better things to do with your time?) directly contradicting what you say right here. But I can see why you wouldn't want to defend it—too difficult. How easily we avoid our own thoughts...

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
I bet zero people in this thread would consider me spiritual at all, because I don't rely on the "spirit world" for my knowledge and revelations, but as someone life affirming, who affirms this world and not the spirit world...

Pay up, buddy! The fact that you do affirm life is spiritual, and at least every bit as much as those affirming some life elsewhere. Hmmm, collection of this wager could be a problem...

However, you do tend to think that when some of us speak of self-transcendence that this is in the traditional mode or methods of life-denial. No matter how many times I have said that true spirituality does NOT involve checking out of life, especially given spirituality is the very "breath of life" - you continue with this presumption that self-transcendence does imply this.

You are looking for a loophole, it seems, that somehow this seeking to become whatever, that the body-mind is constantly doing, is really okay - perhaps even spiritual. It may seem okay, but in reality it is suffering and self-deluding. If the body-mind is so spiritual and so self-satisfied, then why is it always seeking to become something more? Because it is not happy!

Only when ALL the delusions of seeking to become, whether they be in this life domain or elsewhere, are noticed, understood and transcended, can one truly recognize the Reality in which we all arise and are modifications of.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Isn't the "think nothing" aspect of eastern philosophies, basically, just saying clear your mind and don't let the struggles of the mind take a permanent state. It's not saying dont think,as much as be mindful of your thoughts you are thinking.

You wouldn't talk to yourself constantly, because you would never hear what anyone else has to say. So I think you may have taken the "think nothing" aspect a little out of context. If you are constantly having depressing thoughts, the idea isn't to shut them up and shun them, but embrace them and try to discover the source of the thoughts and to be comfortable with them or even accepting them.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Meditation, in its eastern philosophical sense, does have its health benefits, no question. I, to this day, practice breathing exercises. It is only the "think of nothing" aspect of eastern meditation I do without, the aspect that makes meditation out to be a tool of "spirituality". I think teaching oneself not to think is an abortion of the mind and an injustice to the self. To practice housecleaning of the mind, one needs to address thoughts, destroy them, be rid of them, create anew rather than turn and look the other way or sweep them under a carpet.

What has brought you to this conclusion? What has you convinced that a clear mind is so abominable? You speak vaguely about thinking as a tool (which I do agree with to some extent), but you have not actually given specific examples. It seems almost as if your just saying what 'seems right' to you, and not actually anything based off of your experience.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Spirituality didn't start with Jesus or Buddha or some monk sitting on a floor. It started with life and living, and thinking about life and living. Even scientific inquiry is a form of spirituality. It is there for everyone despite what the preachers try to say.

Everything "Spiritual" is already covered in Jesus, Buddha, Adi Shankara, and books written by Monks who spent 40-60 years going within. It's ALL there.

Nobody else is adding anything new to what has already been covered, laid out, and blueprints/maps left behind for others to make the trek.

Saying that one doesn't need any blueprints or direction or to read anything is all ego based illusions.

As far as the "mind/not thinking portion. You've missed the basic premise/point. Reality is prior to thought. When Thought is suspended, a person is still aware of reality without filters, as it is, naked, with out illusion.

EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM in our world is because of the ego/mind and how it is programmed, combined with ignorance and people being to wrapped up in the mind/ego, instead of the heart/intuition/Love/Enlightenment.

This has been covered in VAST volumes of books, thought, debates, all across the world for the last 3000 years. There's nothing new under the sun and for some reason, what a lot of us have been telling you, has been lost in your own translation.

Basically you are creating, discussing, starting threads all based on your own Self Composed Bias Bubble. While some of us here are saying and pointing towards a reality and experience that you can have when you suspend all bias. Let go of, and suspend, all the worldly programming that has been established in you as thought, ideals, abstractions, philosophies, etc ...and what remains?

That which remains when all bias is gone, what is that? Penetrate into that and find out what it is...... The Truth is a Universal Truth that exists prior to all bias, discussion, thought, threads, debates, ideals, abstractions. It's there regardless of what anyone says or thinks.

reply to post by dominicus

Everything "Spiritual" is already covered in Jesus, Buddha, Adi Shankara, and books written by Monks who spent 40-60 years going within. It's ALL there.

Going within, into the body. Looking inward but seeing nothing but one's own thoughts. Always in, never out. It's thought. That's it. 40-60 years of thinking, not living. 40-60 years of sitting, idleness. They are Ways of life. Completely different because they were conceived by different people, personal, relative to no one but the one who thought them.

Saying that one doesn't need any blueprints or direction or to read anything is all ego based illusions as well.

As far as the "mind/not thinking portion. You've missed the basic premise/point. Reality is prior to thought. When Thought is suspended, a person is still aware of reality without filters, as it is, naked, with out illusion.

So is the body. Even the filters are prior to thought. But you seem to not favor that too much. In fact, you dismiss it, mock it, and distrust it—yourself. And then you sell it as truth—your truth.

EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM in our world is because of the ego/mind and how it is programmed, combined with ignorance and people being to wrapped up in the mind/ego, instead of the heart/intuition/Love/Enlightenment.

This has been covered in VAST volumes of books, thought, debates, all across the world for the last 3000 years. There's nothing new under the sun and for some reason, what a lot of us have been telling you, has been lost in your own translation.

The funny thing is, heart/intuition/love/enlightenment are ego-based ideas and invention. What is the heart capable of but providing the body blood? What is intuition capable of but allowing the body to gauge a situation? What is "enlightenment" capable of but making one appear pious? Of course no one wants to face these facts head on because they remove such idealistic ideas, ones we cling to as if they were more important than ourself. Idolatry, superstition, nothing more. This is deceiving oneself and others, finding comfort in illusory ideals and forcing them onto people searching for significance—the true problem of the world.

Basically you are creating, discussing, starting threads all based on your own Self Composed Bias Bubble. While some of us here are saying and pointing towards a reality and experience that you can have when you suspend all bias. Let go of, and suspend, all the worldly programming that has been established in you as thought, ideals, abstractions, philosophies, etc .

Self-composed Bias Bubble? You mean my experience correct? No, one cannot suspend his experience unless he gives up on himself, despises himself, is unsure what to do with his experience, so he runs from it.

You have not suspended any bias either. No one has in the history of mankind. Personal experience and the knowledge derived from it is there whether you like it or not. It is impossible to remove. It is a lie to say otherwise.

..and what remains?

Something other than what you are. A false Ego you can only persist in your mind, as everything else wastes away.

That which remains when all bias is gone, what is that? Penetrate into that and find out what it is...... The Truth is a Universal Truth that exists prior to all bias, discussion, thought, threads, debates, ideals, abstractions. It's there regardless of what anyone says or thinks.

That which remains without experience is a corpse. You preach death and self-renunciation. Penetrate life instead, everything, not just yourself. There's more to world than the mind.

We are talking about the same thing Dominicus, only in different manner of language. We are creating art here. There's no difference between you and me, except perhaps, I don't want followers.

reply to post by woodwardjnr

Isn't the "think nothing" aspect of eastern philosophies, basically, just saying clear your mind and don't let the struggles of the mind take a permanent state. It's not saying dont think,as much as be mindful of your thoughts you are thinking.

You wouldn't talk to yourself constantly, because you would never hear what anyone else has to say. So I think you may have taken the "think nothing" aspect a little out of context. If you are constantly having depressing thoughts, the idea isn't to shut them up and shun them, but embrace them and try to discover the source of the thoughts and to be comfortable with them or even accepting them.

Yes I agree with this. Good point.

One can change the way he thinks, but one can never do without it.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope


I'm not sure being 'spiritual' in a modern sense involves an open-mind, but a very closed mind. I say this because very few can operate or persist their dogmas without the very religious based metaphysics (spirit, not as life, but as eternal substances, holy spirit, mystical forces, mystical states of existence), and a desire and yearning for this metaphysics to be realized and true (faith).

I don't see a spiritual person as having to have dogmas? I mean, surely some do, but those are often what forms when someone is choosing to move out of being spiritual and into being religious. For me, spirituality is a passive observance/experience with no attempt to capture with structure or belief.

A spiritual person can describe "what it feels like, looks like, seems like"...... a religious person will say "what it is".

But then I sit back and I am trying to remember the way I have seen some people use these terms, and realize my view may be not the most common. When meeting someone with a lot of structured beliefs and dogma (of any sort) I tend to look at them as religious, whereas they might describe themselves as spiritual.

LesMis:

Obviously, you've never heard of D.M.T. The first video is an excerpt from the movie, "D.M.T.: The Spirit Molecule".

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
Going within, into the body. Looking inward but seeing nothing but one's own thoughts. Always in, never out.

Yes, this is also another very very common misconception about realizing truth - that you have to go within. I can understand why you are criticizing this, LesMis - because it is such a common presumption by spiritual seekers looking to become something other than what they already are.

There is no more truth in internal experiences than there is in external experiences. It is all conditionality and always involves more and more (albeit perhaps more apparently subtle and deeply pleasurable) forms of seeking. Such experiences can and do make people search for more, because such experiences seem like they provide an alternative to bodily life.

Reality is neither inside nor outside - it is beyond these human notions because everything arises in Reality and as a modification of Reality. Do we really think Unconditional indivisible Reality somehow resides inside our brain-core or can be realized by ascending up through the brain-core or deep within the astral or causal hearts? How presumptuous of our egos to assume such a thing about Unconditional Reality!

Almost the entire esoteric spiritual tradition of mankind has spoken of going within, except in some rare instances - so once again, I understand why there is this common misconception, and also your presumption here, LesMis.

However, I am also not saying that such esoteric practices are wrong - far be it from me to judge them, but there are limits inherent in them. For example, we can clearly see that anything we experience is neither internal or external. This is simple to notice - it is all occurring in awareness only.

So why go within or why go without - in Reality? Reality is in our very midst! No going within or without is necessary, or in fact, even possible. Recognizing Reality is however inherently possible in any moment, regardless.

So why do so many tend to assume truth can only be realized apart from the body - inwardly? This inward search is a cultural product of people wanting to escape the great difficulties (particularly prevalent in the East) and/or distractions (more prevalent in the West) of bodily life, and this inward search is seen as a great option. (This search for bodily escape is countered in some instances of esoteric spirituality, but it is much rarer, and is another topic altogether.)

reply to post by LesMisanthrope

Going within, into the body. Looking inward but seeing nothing but one's own thoughts.

IS that all you see when you go within?

Always in, never out.

Look at the majority of people, and of your own life. Most of the time it's spent outward. If I want to know what is inward, I will not dare ask folks who spend their entire life outward. Would you go to your neighbor(average joe insurance salesman) or a dentist to have your cavity drilled/filled?

It's thought. That's it.

Is that really what you have concluded from going within?

40-60 years of thinking, not living. 40-60 years of sitting, idleness. They are Ways of life. Completely different because they were conceived by different people, personal, relative to no one but the one who thought them.

just like the threads you conceive are relative to no one but the one who thought them up?

So is the body. Even the filters are prior to thought.

If thoughts are the filters of reality, then how are they prior to thought?

But you seem to not favor that too much. In fact, you dismiss it, mock it, and distrust it—yourself.

Lost me there. If logic and reason are slaves of the passions, easy to manipulate, relative to cultural programming/bias, upside down when drunk, or sick, or easily corrupted by power, greed, fortune, fame, then waht part of you is true and legit?

The funny thing is, heart/intuition/love/enlightenment are ego-based ideas and invention.

heart/intuition/love/enlightenment exist prior to any ideas or inventions. When a child is born and before there is even an ego, that child already has a heart, is aware, is egoless.....

What is the heart capable of but providing the body blood?

You'd be surprised. Is that really all you think that the heart is capable of. There is much reading in store for you. I think it's vital that if a person is going to discuss something, like for example the heart, that they have at least been able to spend some time on reading about all the various possible theories and philosophies about it.

I'll drop some gems for you here:

Far more than a simple pump, as was once believed, the heart is now recognized by scientists as a highly complex system with its own functional “brain.”

Research in the new discipline of neurocardiology shows that the heart is a sensory organ and a sophisticated center for receiving and processing information. The nervous system within the heart (or “heart brain”) enables it to learn, remember, and make functional decisions independent of the brain’s cerebral cortex. Moreover, numerous experiments have demonstrated that the signals the heart continuously sends to the brain influence the function of higher brain centers involved in perception, cognition, and emotional processing.

Source
The fact that philosophies like Neo-Platonsim, Buddhism, Christian Mysticism, and Vedic Mysticsim has been saying exactly this for the last 3,000+ years, and science is just now catching up ....well you can surmise your own theories after that.

What is intuition capable of but allowing the body to gauge a situation?

IS that what gauges situations? A Body? Is that what you think you are?

What is "enlightenment" capable of but making one appear pious?

Is that the agreed upon by the majority of the world definition of Enlightenment? A Pious appearance?

Of course no one wants to face these facts head on because they remove such idealistic ideas, ones we cling to as if they were more important than ourself.

Aren't there things that exist that are more important than ourselves?

Idolatry, superstition, nothing more.

How do you know? Can you prove it? If a person directly experiences the Absolute Nature of reality, is that experience an idolatry/superstition? IS your experience of reading this reply idolatry/superstition?

This is deceiving oneself and others, finding comfort in illusory ideals and forcing them onto people searching for significance—the true problem of the world.

Just like you are doing with your own theories?

Self-composed Bias Bubble? You mean my experience correct?

To experience is One thing. To live in a bias bubble filter composed of what you think is right/wrong, truths, lies, mental bias, is another thing.

You have not suspended any bias either.

How do you know?

That which remains without experience is a corpse.

How do you know?

reply to post by HarryTZ

LesMis:

Obviously, you've never heard of D.M.T. The first video is an excerpt from the movie, "D.M.T.: The Spirit Molecule".

You name it, I've likely tried it....although I would never condone such distortions of reality. I will watch the video out of curiosity.

reply to post by bb23108


Take a picture BB, we agree on something.

Originally posted by LesMisanthrope
reply to post by HarryTZ

 

LesMis:

Obviously, you've never heard of D.M.T. The first video is an excerpt from the movie, "D.M.T.: The Spirit Molecule".

You name it, I've likely tried it....although I would never condone such distortions of reality. I will watch the video out of curiosity.

I named it... sounds as if you've never tried it.

And call the experience whatever you want... those who have actually experienced it know there's nothing 'distorted' about it.

reply to post by HarryTZ
Drugs have been used for eons to catalyze insight into various levels of reality beyond this one. However, it is still all in the realm of mind, and is no more the truth than anything else is - and can be highly deluding.

Do we really think that the Unconditional indivisible Reality can be realized through some conditional means? How would that even work? Did any of those folks on the video actually realize Unconditional Reality? It is more egoic searching to become... and it ultimately does not avail.

reply to post by dominicus

The fact that philosophies like Neo-Platonsim, Buddhism, Christian Mysticism, and Vedic Mysticsim has been saying exactly this for the last 3,000+ years, and science is just now catching up ....well you can surmise your own theories after that.

And the books that have been saying the opposite? Heraclitus? Epicurus? Lucretius? Spinoza? Bacon? Machiavelli? Descartes? Aristotle? Schopenhaur? Nietszche? Hawking? James? Freud? Russel? Wittgenstein? Derrida? Foucault? Heidegger? Mill? Hume? Locke? Hobbes? Dewey? Diderot? Santayana? Marx?

I was once Buddhist, I was once a mystic, an ascetic, never a platonist but I spent years studying Plato (who would laugh at the idea of knowing what happens after death)—I've read all their literature. There's two sides to every coin. Why not try the whole coin?

reply to post by HarryTZ

I named it... sounds as if you've never tried it.

And call the experience whatever you want... those who have actually experienced it know there's nothing 'distorted' about it.

Is your argument that you need drugs to experience reality? Is this where you've been getting your conclusions from?

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Absolutely not. Quite the contrary. We are all born sober and we need nothing external to realize our Godliness. However, the drugs are there and they provide one with a glimpse of Reality. It is not Reality itself but a glimpse. The issues arise when one becomes addicted to the escape provided by these little glimpses.

The true thing is far greater than any glimpse.

reply to post by bb23108


Think of it more as a nudge -- a push -- to begin the search for truth. Do it once, try it only a single time, and then set it down. This is the most difficult part. You want to do it again! You begin to crave the experience and that in itself becomes a hindrance for spiritual growth.