Have you ever wondered about why your mind works the way it does, and how it comes up with all of its scattered, random and half-organized thoughts? Where are all of these thoughts coming from, and what's the reason they are there? Many of our thoughts originate from experiences we've had in the past, but the mind will also come up with dreamlike scenarios about events that have yet to take place in our lives.
We will find ourselves in a scenario for a future event, and we will be fully imagining the experience of what it would be like to live in that scenario. Some of these situations can be pleasant, while others are very nightmarish.
We've all had experiences where we can be eating, sleeping, walking down the street, studying, working, listening to music or even engaging in a conversation with someone else, and the mind will begin to drift away to somewhere else. We didn't consciously decide to let the mind wander, but it did. It just left us standing there talking to someone while it decided to go away for a while. This happens all the time!
This happens for prolonged durations during the dreaming state. Our dreams often seem so vivid and detailed, but they weren't our conscious creations. The mind conjures them up and gets very creative. This brings me to that statement Morpheus makes to Neo in "The Matrix":
Have you ever had a dream, Neo, that you were so sure was real? What if you were unable to wake from that dream? How would you know the difference between the dream world and the real world?
No one willingly chooses to have a nightmare where one is chased by an animal, attacked by a murderer or falls off of a cliff. We can wake up in a sweat with our heart beating a million miles an hour. It becomes obvious that we weren't in control of our thoughts at that time, and that we are rarely ever in control of our thoughts at any time.
The Bhagavad Gita describes the tendency of the mind as follows: "For him who has conquered the mind, the mind is the best of friends; but for one who has failed to do so, his mind will remain the greatest enemy."
By referring to the mind as a friend or an enemy, the Gita treats the mind as if it were something different from us. Many times it can sure feel as if someone else, or even a whole group of people, is carrying on elaborate dialogues up there that have little to do with our present reality.
Many Hindu texts create a distinction between the physical body, the mind and intelligence. The mind is often compared to an impulsive child who isn't capable of making proper decisions, and the intelligence is likened to a parent that helps the mind choose the appropriate and healthy course of action.
A mind that isn't given proper attention and is allowed to run wild can cause havoc in our lives. The uncontrolled mind is the sole source of fear, stress and anger in our lives. We've all had the experience of recalling instances where others might have physically, financially or emotionally hurt us. Even though we tell ourselves that "it's over and that there's no need to continue to remember such instances," we find that the mind forcibly brings these thoughts back to the forefront of our consciousness.
The Gita explains that we can either become liberated with the help of our mind or completely degrade our consciousness. Believe it or not, the choice is ours. It may be possible to avoid unpleasant situations, uncomfortable places or unfriendly people, but the mind isn't something we can escape.
The mind lives within us and controls our thoughts, emotions and actions. We go to sleep with it every night and we wake up with it every morning. If we're going to spend that much time with someone, doesn't it make sense to develop a friendship with that individual? The question arises: How do you develop a friendship with someone that you can't see or touch or really even talk to?
First of all, we have to acknowledge that we have a mind and not that we are the mind. Second, we need to be able to admit that we have very little control over the mind's activities. Thirdly, we need to know that we're never going to have complete control over the mind.
Of course, we're not talking about controlling the mind in some forceful, unnatural way. What we want to accomplish is a harmonious relationship between the mind, intelligence and the soul, so that these different components of our being can be on the same page more often. This will lead to a happier and more peaceful existence. This, of course, requires training and practice. Nothing worth achieving ever comes easy.
During the mantra meditation session that I lead at Columbia, I encourage participants to incorporate a regulated practice of meditation into their daily lives. After all, we make time to clothe and feed the body, so why not take time to feed and nourish the mind? Even a short regiment of 10-15 minutes a day will gradually reduce the hurricane-like winds in the mind and grant the mind greater levels of focus and steadiness, which is something we can all use a bit more of.
Follow Gadadhara Pandit Dasa on Twitter: www.twitter.com/nycpandit
Rajiv Malhotra: Gandhi's Dharma and the West
Bhagavad Gita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think this is where meditation comes in as a sort of cleanser of these thoughts. When we can sit peacefully and let go of our ego to focus on what is we can begin to help rid our minds of negativity because the universe is based on pure love. When we see the universe for what it is, love, we see ourselves in that reflection. Then we can let go of that negativity because we see it for what it is; an illusion created by our mind based upon past experience and our subsequent present image. Exercise the mind, strengthen it and give it time to also relax and be cleansed of mind/ego.
Just my thoughts.
Your reply to me is complicated topic for laymen like me Most probably you have read a lot on Ibn-ul-Arabi and go along with his philosophy.
Either the concept of Unity of Being or the Idea of Apparenticism. You may say the difference is only in form but not in substance. You may mix up the substance and accident. But many Muslim Sufis do not agree with that contention.
Existence is common both in God and in the universe and this has led Hindu mystics to conclude that God means the Universe and all that exist on the Universe. But the Ultimate Reality is still far away.
As every human has a soul, the Universe has a soul, it is like the relation that the embryo has with its mother when both are mixed up with each other. God knew best, I am incapable of arguing on that.
Some religious philosophers think there is unity between God and His creations, but in Islam most philosophers like Shah Waliyullah assert that, that Unity is not real. They say that human intellect can reach what they call the universal soul( may be it is termed Nirvana, not very sure) but it can not move a step further and so we say God is incomparable and unfathomable. God is not the Universe, the Ultimate reality is still very, very far away. However the Quran says, God is closer to you than your jugular vein.
"Very far away" is a relative view, though it can certainly be experienced, as we all know. "Closer than your jugular vein" refers to the fact that the Wholeness that permeates and transcends all form, the space and all it contains that is, is Wholeness, itself - Allah, to Muslims.
Non-Dual systems, whether connected with Hinduism, Islam, or any other religion, and of which I see Sufism as One, posit Wholeness - the inherent non-separation of all.
Even many advanced spiritual systems "top out" at the upper range of cosmic consciousness, and some schools of Sufism may do this; I don't know. If they do, they are still dualistic, and so, incomplete.
Accurate spiritual systems posit a "three-in-One-All" model of reality:
1. Form/diversity/objectivity/physical/material.
2. Formlessness/unity/subjectivity/consciousness/energy.
3. Wholeness.
You know .....
1. Islam / Shariah
2. Iman / Tariqah
3. Ihsan / Haqiqah
It's like your analogy with the true meaning of the number One - Unity.
The "beyond" that we're discussing here reflects the true meaning of Zero - Wholeness, that which contains All.
==========
"God is incomparabÂle and unfathomabÂle"
===========
Exactly; "The Tao which can be spoken of is not the Tao."
Wholeness cannot be de-scribed, de-fined, de-signated or otherwise di-vided.
Incidentally why have you left out the Marifa ( which is part and parcel of Ihsan) part of the order Doug?
Under the sharia a person can be compelled to perform the ritual prayer. But sincere devotion cannot be induced by force.
On the Tariqa,therefore a person is taught how to devote his prayers to God Almighty in true sincerity,in such away that he also begins to experience the joy of worship.
If the sharia has to do with hearing and obeying, the Tariqa is about seeing and knowing.
The tariqa teaches acts of worship and good deeds should be performed for the sake of Almighty God and His approval, thereby giving the worshipper a taste of that Divine good pleasure.
The Tariqa imbues our actions with pure intention and sincere devotion along the Way of Truth.The sharia represents the words communicated by God Almighty's Messenger.
The Tariqa represents the actions of God's Messenger, that is, his religious and worldy behavior and conduct.
The Haqiqa represents the blessed state of God's Messenger.
The Marifa represents the sublime mystery of Allah Messenger.
Please tell something about this Marifa
==============
This is actually a very powerful teaching -- and it doesn't negate the reality of non-separation, or Wholeness.
The intellect is a function of partiality and limitation; all its toolsets and creations, including language, number and perceptions -- are relative, and designed to function in an environment of relative distinctions.
The absolute, or Wholeness (Allah, to Muslims) is beyond all limitation, and so, cannot be accessed by the intellect.
The Tao which can be spoken of is not the Tao ..... the Allah which can be spoken of is not Allah.
The teaching behind this teaching is very simple, yet profound: mind, ego and intellect are cutting instruments; ditto language and concept .... and, rather obviously, we cannot cut our way to wholeness, can we?
Intellect is very useful, but by making a God of it, people block realization of the Wholeness that is. When it is said that "it can not move a step further", this refers to intellect - to forms within consciousness, only.
This does not mean it cannot be accessed -- or even that it needs to be .... for that would imply that it could be farther away than, for instance, your jugular vein.
If so, then what exactly is meant by "God's will" in Islam, as its laid out in as so many rules. Of course, I maintain that tribal laws were lifted to the status of "God's laws" in Islam... pure hubris. What of the not making 'images' etc rules... the laws are pretty specific. The whole God's law thing is wrong headed and bogus, as your statement indicates, but alas, good luck trying to convince Kodi.
It is a point of belief in Islam that believers will behold God Most High in the Next Life, with a beholding that is unlike the beholding of created things and free of directionality or encompassing the Beheld. God will be seen unlike any material being, not in a place or in a direction so far as being confronted.
This vision of God is certainly unlike the vision of material things in this world, for vision in this world requires the seen to be in a place, direction, at a specific distance, etc, whilst the vision of God in the hereafter will be free from such restrictions.
God Most High is the necessary existent, and necessarily distinct from created things. He tells us in the Qur'an,
"Like Him there is naught; He is the All-hearing, the All-seeing." (Surah ash-Shura, 11)
This entails that God is exalted beyond the limitations of time and space, for He is the Creator of time and space and all that is in them. He is not a body or form.
Then how can we see God? Wouldn't it entail affirming a direction, body, and form for God?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buraq
Is this some literally true event, an allegory... something else?
The only possible problematic portion being the phrase "next life" ... and so, it might be helpul to know that in both Sufism and Kabbalah (non-dual, yogic Judaism), "next life" doesn't refer to when the physical body dies, but when mind/ego dies ---- yogash chitta vritti nirodhah (yoga/union is the {result of} the non-attachment to {mind} form).
Other than that phrase "next life", the rest of the description could be an overview of the type of experience made possible by nirvikalpa samadhi -- the experience of being in that which is, "where distinction never gazed" as Christian mystic Meister Eckhart wrote.
All traditions have accurate descriptions of this, because all esoteric traditions use different symbol-sets to describe how the full range of being-consciousness is, and operates.
In Hinduism, there are 3 sources of acceptable knowledge… Sruti, Smriti and Nyaya… what is 'heard***', what is 'remembered' (tradition/myths/stories) and logic. If what is 'heard' or 'remembered', when taken literally does not conform to logic, then the meaning of its wording is not to be taken literally, but only symbolically, and it must be pored over ad infinitum to pull meanings out, which however must conform to the standard of logical proof and/or empirical demonstration.
You are using causality as a modus of explanation (God caused Creation), but causality does not even survive Quantum Mechanics, so what hope to apply it to lofty transcendental matters? You are just repeating what has been 'heard' in your tradition and are not measuring it according to logic nor empirical reality, and thus deriving a literal meaning of a necessarily poetic statement.
I am Soul, first cause, the higher view in spirit.
Mind thinking about mind is like a fish thinking about water, something like that...
- Homer Simpson to his son Bart...
Even Homer has the sparks of enlightenment...
you are god, i am god, everything is god, god is everything, the universe is a giant stage upon which we all act our our dramas, it awakens, it goes back to sleep and the cycle repeats every gazillion years.
when you see gods that are elephants, ladies with multiple limbs, and all the other gods that inhabit the hindu pantheon you are not seeing different gods but different manifestations of the same god
Questions, you've got questions, lots of questions. Here, to your question A, you can think about it this way, or that way, or this other way… this way has this problem about it, but this richness, that way has this other problem about it, but this other richness, etc. If you are going to try to capture reality via analysis, then you will have to hold together many ultimately paradoxical and mutually contradictory statements… best of luck in not driving yourself crazy. Your problem is that you are only accessing the mode of knowledge known as Vigyana (diagnosis)… ie analysis, but there is also "Gyana" (Gnosis, direct seeing).
All your questions pertain to wanting to know your existential condition, but you are only using the mode known as dia-gnosis. Here, these are some ways to access the gnostic epistemic mode… silence (Yoga) and the ritual arts. Enjoy all the metaphors, stories, myths, metaphysics… they will make for a great and colourful culture, and if you misunderstand the metaphors, or concretize them, then you will also being ugliness into the culture. Enjoy the fruits of analysis, all the neat things science has invented, but don't worship analysis as your God.
But the more important answer to your questions is… "Who wants to know?"
Everything is made up of atoms...... and atoms are 99.9999 empty space and if you took all the empty space out of the atoms there wouldn't be enough of you left to cover the point of a very sharp needle.
Niels Bohr
"We must be clear that when it comes to atoms, language can be used only as in poetry. The poet, too, is not nearly so concerned with describing facts as with creating images and establishing mental connections."
"Isolated material particles are abstractions, their properties being definable and observable only through their interaction with other systems."
Heisenberg
"There is a fundamental error in separating the parts from the whole, the mistake of atomizing what should not be atomized. Unity and complementarity constitute reality."
"After these conversations with Tagore some of the ideas that had seemed so crazy suddenly made much more sense. That was a great help for me.
On conversations with Rabindranath Tagore, as quoted in Uncommon Wisdom: Conversations With Remarkable People (1988) by Fritjof Capra, who states that after these "He began to see that the recognition of relativity, interconnectedness, and impermanence as fundamental aspects of physical reality, which had been so difficult for himself and his fellow physicists, was the very basis of the Indian spiritual traditions."
Your quote above is essential
"Isolated material particles are abstractioÂns, their properties being definable and observable only through their interactioÂn with other systems."
This thought has now become an essential part of biology too. We no longer view organisms, from bacteria to humans, as the organism itself but the organism/environment and think of that unit as one.
And Ramtha told me soo.
My dreams are always trying to tell me thee things I need to work on, and if I listen to them, by understanding their mythology, it leads to a more prosperous waking life. I have battled with the deciding on being vegetarian or not, and my dreams helped me to know that I should pursue that course. I am a many of many paths, and my dreams have affirmed that the path of many paths is the right path for me.
Maybe some day meditation will be a boon to my life, but as of right now, the yoga of dreaming is much more useful than the yoga of meditation. To each their own of course, and if anyone would like to give me advice for getting more out of meditating, or would like advice on how to get more out of dreaming, I would welcome the conversation :)
'I am' not 'my' anything. 'I am' a complex amalgamation of mind, body, spirit, the things 'I' consume, the people 'I' form relationships with, and more. But without 'my' 'mind', there is nothing there to recognize any of the other things that make 'me', 'me'. It 'is' more 'me' than anything else, because 'it' 'is' the only part of 'me' which can understand a concept like 'me', or any concepts at all. 'It' 'is' also the most illusive part of 'me', otherwise known as consciousness, one of the last, and oldest, great Mysteries. What happens to 'consciousness', to 'mind', when we 'die' is thusly an equally confounding Mystery.
'I' think, 'I am' 'my' 'mind', and that this aspect of 'me', along with that certain other something often called 'soul', will continue on after the passing of the rest of 'my' 'body'(another thing which has never been satisfyingly defined since 'mind' 'is' a part of 'it'), just as 'it' does into the Bardo of Dream.
At the following link, there are 3 consecutive comments by me on the terms 'manas', 'chit', 'chitta', 'buddhi' and 'ahamkara'... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/merlinspinoza/neuroscientist-explains-consciousness_b_783693_67660021.html