Friends

[goddess]

We have a new friend! how delightful!

Friends,

I have always believed that consciousness is the best term to describe what we are made of - regardless of the fact that it is also described as empty or void. I see those latter descriptions as merely relative to manifest existence. Everything we perceive is consciousness-of, except the faculty of perception itself - Awareness if you like.

Recently, I have been graced by the gifts of knowledge being released by Tibetan Buddhists. This knowledge has put better words to my experience, and has tied up a few loose ends.

In "The Ocean of Ultimate Meaning", by Khenchen Thrangu, I find a description that harmonises the cosmology of Western and Eastern spiritual traditions, and which works well for me. (Although I have personally adapted elements to my own cosmology [Hermetic] where the theory has been validated by my experience)

Tibetan Buddhists of certain persuations (particularly the Karma Kagyu) recognise 8 types of consciousness, linking them back to the Abidharma and other Buddist texts.

There are the 5 sense-consciousnesses, all of which have a direct relationship with the sense organs and the phenomenal world. Abu spoke of these.

The 6th is mental consciousness, which includes self-consciousness, imagining, thinking, dreaming, etc.
Meditation can affect everything up to and including the 6th. As this is the area where obscurities arise, any meditation will settle the mind, providing improved clarity for the perception of the 7th and 8th. Levels 1-6 are transitory.

The 7th and 8th are considered to be very subtle, and difficult to apprehend, and although both are very long lived, they are also ultimately impermanent.

The 7th is called the "afflicted" consciousness. It is unchanging, and acts to create a sense of "me" through attachment.(linking a history of related experiences together with our experience of "self-consciousness"). I imagine this is where the practice of Vairagya (Detachment) is most effective. The function of the 7th is to bind things together, and it is generally considered to be something we cannot change.

The 8th is called the ground consciousness, or the principal mind, and this is also unchanging, and also not subject to our control. It is the awareness that allows us to pereceive. The object is to increase this unadorned clarity through practice, and through the removal of obscurations. What follows, when clarity has been enhanced, becomes self-evident.

I think of waves arising from the ocean, and then the spray that arises from the waves.

Hopefully, I have not obscured something for you, that has been clarified for me.

these deeper layers to me seem more like where we should focus our attention... 1-5 and even 6 is a bit of a bore, frankly!

It feels like as we get to 7 and 8 we get closer to the realm of the soul, although clearly level 6 is the level of the kind of interaction between 7 and 8 and the ego/collective consciousness.... hope you guys can track what I am saying here. Let me try another way. The 6th particularly the self consciousness bit is the way you ego inteprets the 7th and 8th.

I do believe I can see my 7th and agree it is long lived. I see it has existed for over 5000 years already, beyond which I cannot see. It has a weirdly ephemeral quality while also similtaneously feeling more like me than anything else, it is like completely free me. Luckily I have unwound all, well at least a lot of the imprinting of the last 5000 years because I have to say it made level 6 a total minefield!

I see that 7 is perfect for this moment in the time/space continuum. At this level I see archetypal being sitting on a mountaintop relating their stories through time to each other but my teacher convinced me that there is more. It seems more than reasonable that she was talking about 8.

So I had to read about 8 again. Ah yes... sounds a lot like the dharmakaya to me, or God if you like, the merging of this I with the One.

And now the tricky bit, first you say they are impernanent and then you say unchanging! We are going to have to work this piece out. I'll race you OK?

What does seem obvious is that when you are grounded in 8 the 7 may or may not be the form you take but your body will still be generated from that level... you know even when I wake up I will still have a female body and it does look to me when I look at the awakened women, like Ganagji for example that their awakening outpictures somewhat differntly from the way it does in men. It is likely a product of this moment in space/time.

And then 8 impermanent, well everyone can change their mind, even God! Thank goodness too since no one is going to miss that old stern guy with the long beard who lords it over from the sky! Cheers to the rebirth of God!

I love Ganagji and Tibetan Buddhism although T buddhists have an annoying habit of treating you like you have never spent a lifetime in a monestry!

What really comes up as the important piece though is why is there an overall ignorance of 6 and 7 and 8 since it seems highly important to me that you look as directly as possible at 6 in order to get to see number 7. They are right about meditation affecting 6 but it is SLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW.

[goddess]

.....

Your first paragraph makes a lot of sense to me. As to the rest it is not yet within my own knowing, but I can imagine that there is more to it. For example, maybe an organising layer, for example, how else does one have one's own karma - the likely responses, reactions and ways of seeing for example that make one's life and makeup itself. For example, the ocean is in unison, shared, but how why when now. etc.

Anyway no significant responses from me at this stage, but I just wanted to say thanks for your input and for joining this discussion. Hope all is well.

Abu

hmmn I beg to differ.... it is already within your knowing since otherwise how did you know about the organising layer?

when it comes with your own words it is a sure sign of knowing.

[Floating_Abu]

What really comes up as the important piece though is why is there an overall ignorance of 6 and 7 and 8 since it seems highly important to me that you look as directly as possible at 6 in order to get to see number 7. They are right about meditation affecting 6 but it is SLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW.

Hi goddess

In Zen Buddhism, we don't really focus nor distract ourself with levels so much. This is not to deny that there are subtleties, but through genuine practice, what is manifest will be manifested and learnt in the most intuitive ways, wordlessly, life becomes the teacher in a myriad forms.

It also seems to me that even what is called Dharmakaya or Buddha or God or whatever we may wish to call things, is just one part of the knowing. It is then life we face and then the choices and making that then are our choice.

Naturally I am the one who started this discussion but I did just want to add this point, as it can be distracting I think for people whom think that there are now numbers to manage and particular consciousnesses to invest in more, devolve from and the like.

I am not familiar with the numbers, but I have some memories of an old monk, perhaps a past life, but I am not really enarmoured with the too spiritual as whatever it is we take and love, we exercise that here and now, in this life, in this very moment and circumstance.

This is the focal point for Zen students, in my own opinion.

[Floating_Abu]

.....

Your first paragraph makes a lot of sense to me. As to the rest it is not yet within my own knowing, but I can imagine that there is more to it. For example, maybe an organising layer, for example, how else does one have one's own karma - the likely responses, reactions and ways of seeing for example that make one's life and makeup itself. For example, the ocean is in unison, shared, but how why when now. etc.

Anyway no significant responses from me at this stage, but I just wanted to say thanks for your input and for joining this discussion. Hope all is well.

Abu

hmmn I beg to differ.... it is already within your knowing since otherwise how did you know about the organising layer?

when it comes with your own words it is a sure sign of knowing.

Was just an extrapolation based on what I am aware of now, nothing more I assure you or I would say it (maybe)

[goddess]

What really comes up as the important piece though is why is there an overall ignorance of 6 and 7 and 8 since it seems highly important to me that you look as directly as possible at 6 in order to get to see number 7. They are right about meditation affecting 6 but it is SLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW.

Hi goddess

In Zen Buddhism, we don't really focus nor distract ourself with levels so much. This is not to deny that there are subtleties, but through genuine practice, what is manifest will be manifested and learnt in the most intuitive ways, wordlessly, life becomes the teacher in a myriad forms.

It also seems to me that even what is called Dharmakaya or Buddha or God or whatever we may wish to call things, is just one part of the knowing. It is then life we face and then the choices and making that then are our choice.

Naturally I am the one who started this discussion but I did just want to add this point, as it can be distracting I think for people whom think that there are now numbers to manage and particular consciousnesses to invest in more, devolve from and the like.

I am not familiar with the numbers, but I have some memories of an old monk, perhaps a past life, but I am not really enarmoured with the too spiritual as whatever it is we take and love, we exercise that here and now, in this life, in this very moment and circumstance.

This is the focal point for Zen students, in my own opinion.

A long time ago I asked a question on this forum, it was to do with why Zen buddhists appear to be more awake than other buddhists. I thought it was strange and wondered why. I recently found out why and the reason is because Zen buddhists do koans! It's quite obvious when you eventually see the answer. And Koans get you to look directly at level six.

Of course levels aren't important, I had never heard of them before but what is interesting to me is to contain all the spiritual wisdoms within. I don't even know it is important but it is part of my level 7 so for the world, it is good.

I do think that if you have been taught 1-5 only there are limitations. Perhaps not for everybody because some people really don't care but if you are the type of person who creates models in your mind then you would find that it is a bit limiting, don't you think?

[Floating_Abu]

A long time ago I asked a question on this forum, it was to do with why Zen buddhists appear to be more awake than other buddhists. I thought it was strange and wondered why. I recently found out why and the reason is because Zen buddhists do koans! It's quite obvious when you eventually see the answer. And Koans get you to look directly at level six.

Of course levels aren't important, I had never heard of them before but what is interesting to me is to contain all the spiritual wisdoms within. I don't even know it is important but it is part of my level 7 so for the world, it is good.

I do think that if you have been taught 1-5 only there are limitations. Perhaps not for everybody because some people really don't care but if you are the type of person who creates models in your mind then you would find that it is a bit limiting, don't you think?

Dear g

Just my opinion (as usual )

Koans are not what they appear - most particularly on the internet so I would not assume knowing what a koan is yet necessarily from the discussions you have read.. even for practicing Zen Buddhists, it is not only with formal koan practice that means that students are working with koans. Koans are also natural byproducts and functions of life, just that some teachers can and will present it in a particular format. Some teachers can be genuine and competent, I wouldn't say all can be or would be. And as I alluded to before it is not a topic easily discussed over an internet forum anyway and even as they are (quite commonly it seems), I think they can be misunderstood very easily - and it seems often are. So it is not my preferred topic nor would I say that is the reason per se (if that is true re: what you say about ZB) ..ie I would be interested in a far wider inquiry before concluding one way or another yet

Re: Models, I have been blessed to not be too distracted by the theories (on the main) as yet, but yes I agree that it can be expansive perhaps (perhaps?) to know there is more than just the physical, or what can be seen and heard materially. Additionally, I would hasten to add that Zen Buddhist practice as I have known and seen it does not evolve beyond the model of 'see for yourself' - ie it is still known and such, but what can be known is beyond the realm of ordinary imagination (and thereby limitation) perhaps.

If any of that makes sense.

Oh yes, I thought last night as well about your question before re the organising layer. It has also to do with seeing a..well I wouldn't say order, but a...an intelligence ? (I wouldn't even know what word to adequately describe it) ..there is something to this world...there is for example, what I have seen as what is wanted, hoped for? comes to the fore (although not always in the ways that are expected!), or lessons come in a way that make sense, or there is a natural kind of progression that orders things to work a certain way, I don't know how to describe it but I have noticed this. There seems to be a far greater wisdom? to all this. Additionally, anyway from observation extrapolation, in the One Mind, all conditions, I believe anyway, manifest, and it is the rotating/recycling of the conditions that all come from and all become and manifest as. Therefore, the One Mind must be all knowing...Bodhimind once said '...Prajna unknowing, knoweth all'. I hope I got that right as I would not want to disrespect he, who taught me so much. Anyway a clumsy attempt (I have a lot of things I should be moving on to soon) so hope it suffices!

Best wishes as always, dearest friend!

Abu-bu

[goddess]

This piece sounds like your opinion, although it transcends opinion, it is your knowing ....

Dear g

Just my opinion (as usual )

....

Oh yes, I thought last night as well about your question before re the organising layer. It has also to do with seeing a..well I wouldn't say order, but a...an intelligence ? (I wouldn't even know what word to adequately describe it) ..there is something to this world...there is for example, what I have seen as what is wanted, hoped for? comes to the fore (although not always in the ways that are expected!), or lessons come in a way that make sense, or there is a natural kind of progression that orders things to work a certain way, I don't know how to describe it but I have noticed this. There seems to be a far greater wisdom? to all this.

Nice and then you go and fit your seeing into another model,or maybe rather fit another model into yours, which is cool, and then you worry a lot about whether you are doing the big man justice, which is 'flying apepoo' in action. Sorry.

Additionally, anyway from observation extrapolation, in the One Mind, all conditions, I believe anyway, manifest, and it is the rotating/recycling of the conditions that all come from and all become and manifest as. Therefore, the One Mind must be all knowing...Bodhimind once said '...Prajna unknowing, knoweth all'. I hope I got that right as I would not want to disrespect he, who taught me so much. Anyway a clumsy attempt (I have a lot of things I should be moving on to soon) so hope it suffices!

Best wishes as always, dearest friend!

Abu-bu

And these are my responses to your arguments......

On models, never been taught one but one has formed, it is not a theory, it is a model. When I see another, say a tibetan one, or a gnostic one, or whatever they always always slot into the one that has formed of it's own accord within me. I know this isn't everyone's cup of tea but some minds hold information like this. I have always been like this. A model becomes real and I can see it in my inner world as surely as I can see my screen in front of me. I don't think in words or facts or numbers or pictures I think in multi-dimensional models. I don't believ my models distract me, I do not ever actively engage them but when they engage me I listen. They just form in there. Perhaps I can explain like this... once when I was a child I was very ill and missed a number of months at school. On my return I had a maths test for which I was totally unprepared. It was on fractions and I had not been taught any of the technicalities, like lowest common denominators etc on how to do fractions via arithmetic methods but I got the model. So in my inner world each question created itself within and I could see the answers without any method. I could just see them and to my teachers utmost suprise I got full marks for the test! Perhaps it was why I studied to be an architect. I was delighted when I first practised to see my inner seeing looking precisely like reality. It was wild! It was perhaps just to see the inside as so real that I did it at all since I have moved on long ago, well except for a pet project every now and then.

On Koans, I have seen that in my parlance, Koans bring up the shadow and when that happens it is inevitable that it begins to clear. Of course life does the same thing, it is a koan, but unless you are knowingly engaging it as such you will continue to run from the suffering and grasp at the pleasure. It is the nature of ego, the small self, whatever you want to call it. And what is more I see many many seekers in a terrible trap right here because they are taught to accept and in that move they make the terrible mistake of taking it as reality and so they remain imprisioned, nothing much ever changing. I see it all the time, it's totally heartbreaking.

So now lets go back to this bit, the best bit...

Dear g

Just my opinion (as usual )

....

Oh yes, I thought last night as well about your question before re the organising layer. It has also to do with seeing a..well I wouldn't say order, but a...an intelligence ? (I wouldn't even know what word to adequately describe it) ..there is something to this world...there is for example, what I have seen as what is wanted, hoped for? comes to the fore (although not always in the ways that are expected!), or lessons come in a way that make sense, or there is a natural kind of progression that orders things to work a certain way, I don't know how to describe it but I have noticed this. There seems to be a far greater wisdom? to all this.

I see this too, this underlying intellegience all unfolding with utmost perfection. And yes I see that bit too, the part where what I have wanted and hoped for dreamed as far back as I can remember coming to the fore. I have seen that my pure hearts desire is the the creator of the world, the non duality of creator, creation. I see glimmers of the vastness of emptiness pregnant with everything

I also see how things come to me in a most specific order. I think it was one of the most valuable things I ever saw. The sweetness of the journey reveals itself then. The perfectly compassionate universe, perfectly dedicated to the awakening of all beings each in their own way. When I walk down the road, I am in the habit of blessing each person, 'may you unfold perfectly' and I see them change before my eyes and my world and me change too.

Thanks for this conversation, this piece has really tuned me into the great perfection.

[Floating_Abu]

Nice and then you go and fit your seeing into another model,or maybe rather fit another model into yours, which is cool, and then you worry a lot about whether you are doing the big man justice, which is 'flying apepoo' in action. Sorry.

Perhaps you could make your point without also insulting, but I am interested - what are you actually trying to say here?

And these are my responses to your arguments......

On models, never been taught one but one has formed, it is not a theory, it is a model. When I see another, say a tibetan one, or a gnostic one, or whatever they always always slot into the one that has formed of it's own accord within me. I know this isn't everyone's cup of tea but some minds hold information like this. I have always been like this. A model becomes real and I can see it in my inner world as surely as I can see my screen in front of me. I don't think in words or facts or numbers or pictures I think in multi-dimensional models. I don't believ my models distract me, I do not ever actively engage them but when they engage me I listen. They just form in there. Perhaps I can explain like this... once when I was a child I was very ill and missed a number of months at school. On my return I had a maths test for which I was totally unprepared. It was on fractions and I had not been taught any of the technicalities, like lowest common denominators etc on how to do fractions via arithmetic methods but I got the model. So in my inner world each question created itself within and I could see the answers without any method. I could just see them and to my teachers utmost suprise I got full marks for the test! Perhaps it was why I studied to be an architect. I was delighted when I first practised to see my inner seeing looking precisely like reality. It was wild! It was perhaps just to see the inside as so real that I did it at all since I have moved on long ago, well except for a pet project every now and then.

Ahh perhaps we are talking at cross purposes, but that's OK as I find what you say interesting nevertheless I am not arguing against models per se - by which I actually mean theories - but I am saying, and would repeat again, that these can be distracting, particularly for students. In Zen practice, which is my mainstay for now, we are asked to focus on the practice, and this is the right area of practice. What is, is. And any theories which come before the fact can just be a very convenient distractions. Again I am talking about proper (which means constructive, useful hopefully) focus for a student in Zen.

As to your inner seeing and the like, I don't share those capacities but if it is your path, it is your way. This is how information seems to come to and through you. For example myself, I just sense things, but I can't say that is through any of hearing, seeing, thinking, touching, tasting..and when I read things either they resonate or they do not. Much of what I sense resonates with a lot of writings or pointers from many great traditions, of course including Zen Buddhism but also Sufism and the like.

I would say again though I think we are talking about different things - or maybe focus?. You are just talking about how you sense, see, I suspect whereas I am talking about proper focus for Zen students, and that relationship to theories, including extraneous theories.

(By the way, I wouldn't mind learning that, I have a few exams I might need to pass myself..!)

On Koans, I have seen that in my parlance, Koans bring up the shadow and when that happens it is inevitable that it begins to clear. Of course life does the same thing, it is a koan, but unless you are knowingly engaging it as such you will continue to run from the suffering and grasp at the pleasure. It is the nature of ego, the small self, whatever you want to call it. And what is more I see many many seekers in a terrible trap right here because they are taught to accept and in that move they make the terrible mistake of taking it as reality and so they remain imprisioned, nothing much ever changing. I see it all the time, it's totally heartbreaking.

Sure, interesting in a way. I have come up with own interesting case recently, where what I would like to criticise or reject, is exactly my way and mode. So as I am no longer so focussed or sure about my own judgements, well it does force me to evaluate whether those principles are still what I truly hold as it is continually 'in my face' so to speak. Life is pretty amazing sometimes.

But yeah, thanks for what you say. But I wouldn't say it's only shadows, sometimes its just asking us to make choices. Oft times its like this too. How will you solve it, make your choices now within these limited conditions of this human life for example. Or how will you apply now what you may lay claim to with the mouth or with your understanding etc.

I see this too, this underlying intellegience all unfolding with utmost perfection. And yes I see that bit too, the part where what I have wanted and hoped for dreamed as far back as I can remember coming to the fore. I have seen that my pure hearts desire is the the creator of the world, the non duality of creator, creation. I see glimmers of the vastness of emptiness pregnant with everything

I also see how things come to me in a most specific order. I think it was one of the most valuable things I ever saw. The sweetness of the journey reveals itself then. The perfectly compassionate universe, perfectly dedicated to the awakening of all beings each in their own way. When I walk down the road, I am in the habit of blessing each person, 'may you unfold perfectly' and I see them change before my eyes and my world and me change too.

Thanks for this conversation, this piece has really tuned me into the great perfection.

Mm yes creation, but it is interesting how those worlds collide, or collapse or come together as such. That is the wider order or intelligence I would suppose, the absolute wonder of how something like this could be..

I don't know how the Universe is dedicated as you say, but sure I can imagine that is the case. Still I think that until someone is ready, well the world gives you what you want until perhaps one day someone is sick (ie no longer so enarmoured) by all the other distractions or possibilities or experiences if you like. We are all on a course of learning I suspect, and we are allowed to try what we may want, I also suspect. (SUSPECT being the operative word)

About emptiness, in the Heart Sutra we chant, form is emptiness, emptiness is form, form is exactly emptiness, emptiness no other than form. Thus what is seen - it is both real and -- interesting eh.

Pleasure is also all mine.

Abu-bu

[BuddhiHermit]

Oh my Goodness! - Goddess and Abu : Such a wealth of discourse!

My response is fragmented but I will post the first part that arose.

And now the tricky bit, first you say they are impermanent and then you say unchanging!

OK, my poor terminology here. I mean that they remain unruffled [unchanging] - a flat ocean versus waves and ripples. All
arising is at level 6.

Why so much ssslllooowww teaching at levels 1-6?
A great part of Buddhist teaching is logic-based and was targeted so that it could be understood by the majority of Indians
in Buddha's time, so we don't see a lot of teaching about the deeper levels. The Tibetans and some of my Zen teachers
clarified that the majority of Buddhist teaching is up to Mahayana stage - 6th level, and that strong practice in insight is
required to look deeper. Advanced Shikan-taza and Koan work are designed to reveal these levels, and it is at these levels
that life finally begins to make sense (not to mention being joyful). The Tibetans use Vajrayana/Tantra and Mahamudra techniques
instead.

Zen does not eshew theory - it is simply not discussed these days, but if you look into history, you will find
that the early Patriarchs had a very clear theoretical framework. Most Koans are actually based on ancient theoretical
Buddhist concepts that are considered most "UN-ZEN" these days. But that is just a commentary on how we westerners found
Zen to be oh-so-mysteriously impenetrable, and now work hard to proagated that idea. Zen is only impenetrable if you take it
out of its theoretical context.

Must go - more later.

[Floating_Abu]

Oh my Goodness! - Goddess and Abu : Such a wealth of discourse!

Must go - more later.

Look forward to it and ditto

[goddess]

Abu I agree with the general idea you are conveying about theories. I think you also saw that I was talking models not theories. I think the difference lies in the that the models are real and live and working inside. You could learn a theory off by heart and pretend to know but from a model you can explain out a theory in a million different ways. I think the theories are written for minds like mine and totally see that they are a waste of time for a mind that isn't touched by them.

But you also talk of a resonance, a resonance with what? And isn't that the point of any teaching anyway? To activate that resonance?

So sorry for the insult I just don't get the deference to some old dead Zen master! If a teaching doesn't resonate, it is irrelvant, it is not yours. In time it may become yours or perhaps not. No disrespect to Zen, I think it is a noble tradition.

I agree that practise is the basis but then again we have to talk about something!

[goddess]

Oh my Goodness! - Goddess and Abu : Such a wealth of discourse!

My response is fragmented but I will post the first part that arose.

And now the tricky bit, first you say they are impermanent and then you say unchanging!

OK, my poor terminology here. I mean that they remain unruffled [unchanging] - a flat ocean versus waves and ripples. All
arising is at level 6.

Why so much ssslllooowww teaching at levels 1-6?
A great part of Buddhist teaching is logic-based and was targeted so that it could be understood by the majority of Indians
in Buddha's time, so we don't see a lot of teaching about the deeper levels. The Tibetans and some of my Zen teachers
clarified that the majority of Buddhist teaching is up to Mahayana stage - 6th level, and that strong practice in insight is
required to look deeper. Advanced Shikan-taza and Koan work are designed to reveal these levels, and it is at these levels
that life finally begins to make sense (not to mention being joyful). The Tibetans use Vajrayana/Tantra and Mahamudra techniques
instead.

Zen does not eshew theory - it is simply not discussed these days, but if you look into history, you will find
that the early Patriarchs had a very clear theoretical framework. Most Koans are actually based on ancient theoretical
Buddhist concepts that are considered most "UN-ZEN" these days. But that is just a commentary on how we westerners found
Zen to be oh-so-mysteriously impenetrable, and now work hard to proagated that idea. Zen is only impenetrable if you take it
out of its theoretical context.

Must go - more later.

Ya I was offered to join a mahamudra group once and I see my friend who did not actually seeing very clearly why he is even doing nongdro. It feels to me like there is a subtle or not so subtle holding onto power by the tibetan lineages. I like demystified mysticism, the god direct path if you like. I see that if you are doing your unfolding in the world, you hardly need a practise to bring up all the darkness, you just need to look around you.

My dear Tibetan Buddhist friend has become disheartened with his practise and I see it is because they have not taught him how to work deeply with his own life, how to burn away his karma in the workplace say and so he plods on, accepting that he is a victim of evil samsara. Of course the tadition cannot be blamed, it is equally his own doing, as he says he believes in the tibetans because of their pedigree! He's trying desperately to find a safe path! All the while being gobsmacked by the stories they tell him. I can see he resists 90% of the teachings on some level and I don't see his teachers trying to explain it to him in a way that he can get it.

What I see with relation to the story of resonance we have made, is that he does not trust his own at all and has manifested a teacher and teachings which are a perfect reflection of this lack. But he has not been taught to see his inner workings mirrored in his outer world. I don't get why his lama doesn't just spell it out for him! on second thoughts, I now remember reading a chapter in his lama's book on exactly this topic!

The lamas sure are interesting. I was once having a very serious projection of evil on the DL and a few days later I received an email with a picture of the DL making a devil face complete with finger horns! It was like a magical message telling me he knew what I was up too and that it was an illusion that I would see through in time! I have and I see he is surrounded by a beaurocratic power structure with all the problems of the world reflected.

[PeterB]

So let me understand this goddess, because you had bad thoughts about the Dalai Lama, he communicated to you by E Mail making a particular sign in order to communicate to you the fact that he knew that you had those thoughts about him ?

[goddess]

No PeterB you are not getting me. I'll give you infinite guesses, please try again!

[PeterB]

No. I will leave that set of your projections with you goddess, and walk on.

[goddess]

Good then

[BuddhiHermit]

G. - I have found that most traditions are quite obstinate in insisting that one tread their well worn path, an inch at a time. This is appropriate for many people, but not all. Needless to say, that demanding security while exploring the unknown, will guarantee no sight of the unknown at all!. It sounds rather more that he is afraid of looking at parts of himself that he may discover he may not like.

Your psychic experience with the DL reminded me of a similar experience I had many years ago. I had been in the habit of practicing changing traffic lights to green when my mind suddenly froze with the thought, "Did I change the light, or did the light change me?". I realised that I had no way of telling whether I was changing the lights, or whether I was just anticipating them, and modifying my explanations accordingly!

A little clarification - I tend to mix the word "theories", with the word "models", in that theories are to me, the verbal expression of a model. The model contains so much more, and can provide useful trigger points to expand understanding, but I consider both to be temporary and flexible.

Both are maps - neither are the experience.

OK, Going back to my analogy of the ocean, I would first say that it is actually indivisible, as it's all water - only the form and quality changes. Then I would suggest that the Dharmakaya is like the deeper parts. Levels 1-5 would include the sea-spray and foam, level 6 the ripples and waves, level 7 the surface - including surface tension, and level 8 being the upper water. If we stretch the analogy much further it will break, so I will stop there.

The reason this was all so interesting to me was that it explained our inner being from an angle that affirmed both my experience, and the content of the Buddhist message.

I am familiar with the senses, and the corresponding mental responses. I am familiar with the mental landscape of thoughts and visions, and the way in which thoughts and emotions arise from an inner "ground" consciousness. I can recognise this ground consciousness even when it does not manifest as a thought, feeling, or sense. I am familiar with inner "space" which at its various levels/depths is called Shunyata, or emptiness, and I am familiar with that inner presence that becomes clarity, and which is sometimes also called awareness. I do not see these things visually, but rather simply perceive them.

These are all just natural perceptions that constantly grow clearer with time, meditation, and the removal of "obstructions", so I am sometimes bemused to hear them elevated to such holy states.
Being able to name them with certainty across a number of traditions however, allows me to focus on whatever I want without the uncertainty of not knowing what it is, that I am exploring. (That doesn’t mean that I find nothing Holy – just that Holiness is perceived through Heart, rather than Mind, and this is all about Mind.)

Some time ago, I was puzzled by the whole Buddhist “emptiness” and dependent origination thing, but then I discovered that it was all just basic stuff like: “atoms make elements, which make molecules, which make cells, which make organs, which make animals”, and that emptiness firstly meant no – thing. Well of course, there are no things inside!. The extension into no-inherent-self took a little longer, but I already had a good idea about how probability theory also explained dependent arising. Once I discovered that level 7 consciousness is like glue, I could see that I could relate it to magnetism, or better yet to gravity, and the way they attract things close to them.

In relation to Self, I think of the way that the force of gravity causes things to clump together, just like we clump our experiences together, and then view them as a self existing ego, when in fact, it is only a localised conglomeration of our space, our awareness, and our experiences.

This is a limited model of one area of experience, that can be tested in the fires of life and meditation, but I find it a useful practice in lay life. While sitting, I start with the model, and then totally abandon it in favour of pure exploration.

[PeterB]

So, let me be clear Buddhihermit. You are able to change traffic lights at will.

[BuddhiHermit]

Yes of Course! - can't we all?

I was experimenting to determine whether a certain pattern of behaviour did in fact cause traffic lights to change, despite my scepticism. Very strangely, I went for two weeks straight, getting green lights every time.

My preferred theory is that I somehow entered a flow that anticipated the traffic lights, but hey, maybe I am really the god of traffic lights, currently in denial...

[PeterB]

Right...o.....kay....

I wonder whats for lunch.