Post by withinsilence on Jul 10, 2012 12:50:00 GMT
There is no place to "get to" There is no level to "achieve" There is no higher self than to return to what one originated as.
A spiritual being is nothing less than a human being who simply returned to its natural state, awoke to who its always been, became aware that its not who it "thought" is was, had the light of truth dawn on it and dispelled the darkness of falsity etc. This being is content with whatever existence presents before it, unwavering, doing not doing with full awareness and allowing truth to shape it as it wills.
When did this "dreamer needing to wake up" meme come to be?
Consider ancient man for a second. Before language came into existence. Though he would have still had fears and beliefs (expressed through emotions I suppose) would you consider him to have been "asleep"? Was he a 'slave to Mind"? Could there have been any "sages" back then? Someone who, say, recognized the folly of 'fears/beliefs/making distinctions/etc', and retreated to a 'no-mind/here-now' understanding? What would have been the impetus to do so? Would 'fearing a tiger might eat you' or 'believing the sun would come up tomorrow' be considered suffering?
I say, "before language came into existence", because nowadays, 'problems with Mind' seem to revolve around all those words and thoughts swirling around ones head. Ancient man, pre-language, wouldn't have had that issue. Yet, his intelligence probably wasn't necessarily that much less than modern man's.
edit: crap, I was gonna completely re-write this before you saw it. oh well ... lol
little by little I think is best, slow and steady wins the race, or at least usually finishes without crashing, haha so, "dreamer" implies some-thing seemingly unaware but what exactly is awareness vs say knowledge, intelligence, intellect, smart, educated, wise, informed? how is awareness different?
Notice when you dream and remember it you "were" aware of it even though you were sleeping right? how? why some and not others? hummmm......
I have had lucid dreams, yet it was a dream...or was it? its like Chuang Tzu's story of dreaming he was a butterfly, then he woke up and didn't know if he was a butterfly dreaming he was a human or a human dreaming he was a butterfly?
one is not "awakening" as much as they are "remembering" ime (in my experience or how I understand/perceive it)
so far I think ancient man was very present/aware/awake/alert as mind was empty/open/not conditioned/divided thus I think that he was not asleep or a slave to mind. It may have been ignorant but in regards to what?
Jesus said, "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds. When he finds, he will become troubled. When he becomes troubled, he will be astonished, and he will rule over the All."
Jesus said, "If those who lead you say, 'See, the Kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the Kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living Father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."
"Biblical criticism refers to the investigation of the Bible as a text, and addresses questions such as authorship, dates of composition, and authorial intention."
Jeebus said what exactly? Who wrote it down at the time? How accurate was that persons transcription? Written in what language; archaic Hebrew or Greek? Who was the translator(s)? How many translations have the words gone through? Did any Pope's/Cardinals alter any of the words out of ignorance, or personal beliefs, or to enhance the roll of the Church?
exactly popee, wow someone who has opened their mind beyond blind belief!
Also notice Jesus didn't write anything ever and what was written was what someone else said he said, and you only are reading what they wanted to tell you, (like the current media) and that got interpreted through their thought patterns, perceptions, beliefs, what they "thought" thus one may want to inquire into them self, see if what is "taught" as truth is truth, how do you know?
As Buddha taught: "believe nothing, not even what I tell you!" now that is a master, completely whole within himself, no ego, no need for approval or acceptance, always pointing to you to your Buddha nature.
a master needs no students, a master is a vehicle to reveal masters, to remove your delusions that your not your own master, his whole purpose is to undo what you've allowed to happen to yourself, to bring about your own awareness of yourself, his whole effort is that one day you will get up and walkout your own master. he sees not himself above you, although he may use this belief to destroy your ego, then once destroyed he will begin to reveal to you that you are him and he is you, he helps you to remember who you've always been.
"Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled on the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that a man does assert, is exactly the part he ought to doubt - himself. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt - the Divine Reason." - G.K. Chesterton
Thank you Gurth for your post, it inspired me, stoked the flame of poetic expression within me that has been smoldering for awhile. Also was unfamiliar with G.K. Chesterton and upon reading some of his works, well they speak for themselves.
It seems lately I have been caught in the minds web of thinking not to think, trying to be in no thought which, on one hand is the extreme opposite of excessive thought and is a place of serenity, yet it seems that as one leads to the other and too much of that leads back to the original, the most natural place to reside is somewhere in the middle, which it seems life is guiding everything too, albeit in ways I never thought of.