"The Controversy"

"Personally, I'm skeptical that there is a "right" answer, so I'm always a little puzzled by the certitude of those who have this figured out. ......I always find it most helpful to renounce everything I think I know in favor of whatever is next.

"

Seconded.

"The Buddha himself spoke of a Consciousness that was "Infinite, Eternal, Unchanging, and was the Liberator" of those suffering and lost in Delusion. (That last part was a paraphrase.) "

This is something I've neither experienced in my practice nor in the Buddha's teachings.

I have a very difficult time relating to pure, infinite awareness teachings, not just because they contradict my own beliefs, but because my own, modest practice seems to keep pointing in the opposite direction. My two, most dramatic openings thus far - A&P and stream-entry - both seemed to follow on the realization that it's all impermanent, it's all "over there", it's all beyond control -- especially anything I've ever taken to be a self. I have never found any remainder, anything I would feel comfortable calling a pure observer, certainly nothing I would feel comfortable calling infinite or eternal. (2nd path was just a repeat of stream-entry, just more intense.)

Of course, this might all change at some point. I might round a corner and have an experience that changes everything. Though I get the impression that people take out of this practice, in part, what they put in. If you go in looking for three characteristics, you'll find nothing but three characteristics. If you go in looking for infinite mind, you'll find that. If you go in expecting all these experiences to line up and point at the same thing, chances are you'll eventually conclude they do. If not, then no.

This again is the problem with much of Buddhism. How can you strive for a "goal' or for Liberation if you don't know what the Truth is? "Bhikkhu Bodhi" clearly disagrees with the Buddha's remarks in The Lankavatara Sutra where he points out that all apparent clinging and delusive thinking is unreal and created by the mind. Once Awareness sees the thought, (Or "Defilement"). in that moment it ceases to be. "Time" is the mind, is Maya and is founded on the "I" thought. Reality is not in time. The Self, Unconditioned Being is NOW. Any attempt to "get there" is thought reifying itself so that it won't die. Consciousness identifies itself with thought thereby giving life to the Dream of Seperation. All seeking is moving away from Present Reality into imaginary time and becoming. Virtually all of us are caught, mired, in this web of seeking and sorrow created by our own mind.

Shankara was a great Realizer he didn't need to "borrow" from Buddhism.

" What" is empty? That is not the Truth. That's not all the Way Thru to the end. You are still speaking of change and therefore phenomena and therefore there's still a "witness" to what arises. Sorry. No cookie. .

What is it that cares about this apparent "controversy"?

What animates this kind of discussion?

Isn't it interesting to notice what the fuel is that keeps this kind of talk going?

For what it's worth, I mostly notice anxiety, with the idea that one of these Truths will be the life-raft to end all life-rafts.

How about you?

"What is it that cares about this apparent "controversy"?

What animates this kind of discussion?

Isn't it interesting to notice what the fuel is that keeps this kind of talk going?

For what it's worth, I mostly notice anxiety, with the idea that one of these Truths will be the life-raft to end all life-rafts.

How about you?"

Nice.

Well, I can't speak for the other four individuals who posted in response to this (yourself included), but I can speak for myself. I saw the thread pop up, quickly browsed it, thought about my own practice, and thought about questions that have come up for me in relation to it and comparing it with the practices of other people here. I can't perceive anxiety in myself about it, just curiosity and probably most of all a desire to relate to other human beings about the content and meaning of my own practice. Like many people here, I practice wholeheartedly and diligently, but I don't belong to a sangha, and so these are some of my only opportunities to discuss practice and the results of practice. Unfortunately it seems as though some or many of my contributions don't fit in here.

I don't think the majority of people who post here and who participate in discussions here are looking for trouble, either for themselves or for anyone else. I don't think they're looking to be told that what they care about or are interested in is pointless. And I don't think they're looking to be told that what they care about is the mere result of psychological impulses.

If there's a sincere desire to help other people improve their practices, including helping people move off fruitless intellectual searches toward more fruitful ones, I wonder if there's a less lofty, less dismissive-sounding way to do that. And if there's not a deeply felt desire to help people improve, I wonder why words should be spoken at all, and if they're spoken, whether they're more conducive to effective practice than the original discussion.

Hi, apperception. You and I seem to be experiencing this thread topic very differently. I'm sorry to have offended you. Thanks for your sincere reply, though I won't be responding in kind to your post. Please don't take that personally, I'm just not very interested in the debate. -Ryan