---No it's not "blame" that's the impediment. It's "reasons" as in cause and effect. MMY is right!... Stress.
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 2007, at 5:24 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: > > > So, over coffee on this bright new morning in FFL > > history, after reading all the posts from last > > night, and bearing in mind the Reward vs. Punish- > > ment post I made yesterday, I don't feel like > > responding to any of them. Instead I'll rap for > > a little while on a favorite theme -- the two > > most prevalent approaches to Self Realization. > > > > Although there are more than two, of course, I > > think that one can safely sort them into two piles. > > The first pile has a label that says, "Believes in > > the concept of non-enlightenment, and the existence > > of things that can prevent enlightenment." The > > second label says, "Believes in the ever-present > > existence of enlightenment, that one is always > > already enlightened, that the only thing necessary > > to be enlightened is to *realize* that you already > > are enlightened, and that no obstacles to that > > realization can or do exist." > > > > It seems to me that TM and many other forms of > > spiritual development fall into the first box, > > whereas some forms of Advaita or Neo-Advaita or > > Zen or Taoism fall into the latter. *Both* of > > these approaches and "ways of seeing" are valid, > > in my opinion, in that they describe reality from > > a particular state of attention. One's *predilection* > > for one description or the other is all that matters. > > > > In the "I believe in non-enlightenment" box, there > > seems to me to be a fascination with BLAME. "I'm > > not enlightened because of my stress/my samskaras/ > > my sins/the state of the world/other people fucking > > with me/all of the above. If these things weren't > > present, I'd have an easier pathway to enlightenment." > > > > In the "I'm always already enlightened" box, there > > seems to be no such fixation on BLAME. It's a path > > that is more concerned with CHOICE. "At every moment > > of every day, I have the choice to realize and live > > my ever-present enlightenment. My ability to *make* > > that choice is not affected by anything." > > > > I kinda prefer the latter path, but I understand those > > who prefer the former. It's a safer path, full of > > prescriptions for the things one must do to avoid the > > obstacles and "become" enlightened, and equally full > > of proscriptions against doing any of the things that > > "prevent" enlightenment. > > > > The "I'm already enlightened, if I just choose to > > realize that" approach doesn't tend to have that many > > do's and don'ts. What would be the point, if neither > > the do's nor the don'ts have any effect on one's > > always-already-present enlightenment? > > > > Anyway, I'm just throwing this out as a potential > > topic for discussion. If anyone is interested in the > > subject, pile on. If not, carry on and use your five > > posts as you choose. > > > The classic distinction between a "gradual" path and a "sudden" path. > > It is helpful IMO to have some stability in sitting practice to the > point where deluded thoughts no longer predominate. If one is > introduced into pristine, nondual awareness too soon one can get > stuck in a kind a verbal dogmatism where they need to discuss their > experience(s) over and over again with others. This is what a lot of > the Neoadvaita movement is about IMO. Then these same people go on to > try and point out pristine awareness to others. There are a number of > problems that arise from this, almost all result from a lack of basic > meditative stability. We need that basic stability to prevent > ourselves from falling prey to our own delusions, otherwise we end up > confusing clarity or the continuity of awareness, etc. with the > nondual state. > > A quote from _Old Man Basking In the Sun_ a text on Unity: > > The lived reality of freedom in nonduality is not feasible for those > aspirants on the gradual approaches. A young musk deer springs > sprightly up a cliff, a feat that other animals cannot emulate; the > yogin or yogini walking the sky-like path of nonaction is readily > liberated in the matrix of non-intentional gnosis, an impossibility > for the disciple on a linear goal-oriented path. > > With the nonreferential awareness of timeless buddhahood is it > possible to wander in samsara? The little mind that believes in > material reality is freed in space, released in the unsupported > matrix! > > The deluded mind, distinguishing between sameness and difference, > is released in unity, released into the matrix of reality! > In the zero-dimensional holistic seed, can there be dualistic > perception? The deluded mind distinguishing between sameness > and difference is instantaneously released in unity, freed in the > reality-matrix! > > In self-sprung awareness, causeless, non-conditional, is it possible > that the five poisons can arise? Blocks to total presence, desire in > the material world, are instantaneously released, freed in the > matrix of pristine awareness! > > Can spontaneity, impartial and unlimited, be tainted by prejudice? > The unbalanced mind, attached to its biased opinions, is released > through ultimate tolerance, freed in the matrix of spontaneity! > Can indeterminate emptiness without substance or attribute show > itself as appearance? Appearances are released in clear light, > released in the matrix of ambiguity! all-inclusive and indivisible, > released into the matrix of spontaneity! without uniting or > separating, released in the nuclear matrix! arising in all possible > ways, released in the matrix of ambiguity! > > Appearance arising as form is released as light; vibration arising as > sound, whatever is heard is naturally released; whatever > appearance is seen, whatever sound is heard, whatever is perceived > in the five doors of perception, is `seen' by itself and there is > nothing other than that. > > In nonduality, object and mind are released as one; whatever > emerges out of unitary sameness is a unitary field; all created > qualities are the existential ground; everything whatsoever, > liberated without deliberate action, is a matrix of total freedom. > > > BTW, I'm still getting two posts for each one sent from you. If you > keep this up, you'll only get 2.5 posts a day. ;-) >
