Nobody has cut, nobody feels pain. Pain alone is. You do not need effort to feel pain, pain just happens on its own. Seeing happens on its own.. etc. If you presume there is a 'self' feeling pain, what is this 'self'? Since you say there is a 'self' feeling pain, there must be something 'inside here' stationary experiencing the impermanent 'out there'. If this 'I' is impermanent, then it is not the experiencer, it is part of the changes of the world. Just like clouds coming and parting. The 'self' is just like that - thoughts coming and parting, ideas, concepts, etc. Then what is this 'I'? Nothing but a fictitious entity.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:If you got cut, who is feeling pain?
What is This Me?
A somber day, isn't it? Dark, cloudy, cool, moist
and windy. Amazing, this whole affair of the weather!
We call it weather, but what is it really? Wind.
Rain. Clouds slowly parting. Not the words spoken about it, but just this
darkening, blowing, pounding and wetting, and then lightening up, blue sky
appearing amid darkness, and sunshine sparkling on wet grasses and leaves.
In a little while there'll be frost, snow and ice covers. And then warming
again, melting, oozing water everywhere. On an early spring day the dirt
road sparkles with streams of wet silver. So - what is weather other than this
incessant change of earthly conditions and all the human thoughts, feelings
and undertakings influenced by it? Like and dislike. Depression and elation.
Creation and destruction. An ongoing, ever-changing stream of happenings
abiding nowhere. No real entity weather exists anywhere except in thinking
and talking about it.
Now, is there such an entity as me or I? Or is it
just like the weather - an ongoing, ever-changing stream of ideas, images,
memories, projections, likes and dislikes, creation and destruction, that
thought keeps calling I, me, Toni, and thereby solidifying what is
evanescent? What am I really, truly, and what do I merely think and believe
...(see url)[/quote]Originally posted by An Eternal Now:"Mere suffering is, not any sufferer is found
The deeds exist, but no performer of the deeds:
Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it,
The path is, but no wanderer is to be seen.
No doer of the deeds is found,
No one who ever reaps their fruits,
Empty phenomena roll on,
This view alone is right and true.
No god, no Brahma, may be called,
The maker of this wheel of life,
Empty phenomena roll on,
Dependent on conditions all."
- Visuddhimagga XVI 90
Editor's note: Pls do not misunderstand that there is no karma and karmic fruits, but there is no Self - all phenomena are empty, depending on conditions do they arise. [conditioned arisings]
(my irc didn't register the last sentence to the first paragraph)Originally posted by An Eternal Now:We are unable to experience the full power of Presence because we objectify reality. Just like thoughts are objectified in art, a process is objectified into something concrete by ideas. There must be an 'I' experiencing from moment to moment is an assumption, it is not reality. When we do away with all labeling and become bare in attention, it is always this process, arising and ceasing from moment to moment and the reality of existence is
The entire field of Pure Awareness is truly an inter-dependent process, not an objectified entity. 'I' no matter how skillfully put, is always a form of holding (attachment) in disguised that results in separation. Without it, experiencing becomes simple, lucid, complete and direct, there is no vagueness. Presence is a free flow of pure awareness that is vibrantly clear and liberating.
When the 'I-Thought' that has been trapping us subsides, 'shadows' disappear, not only the images in terms of thoughts disappear, the entire body seems to disappear because everything is felt directly like a transparent mirror reflecting. 'Now' is this free flowing reflection. This is the beauty and full power of the Presence. GongggggÂ….how clear!
[quote]Empty and devoid of ego is the nature of all things.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Just as a man shudders with horror when he steps upon a serpent, but laughs when he looks down and sees it is only a rope, so I discovered one day that what I was calling "I" cannot be found, and all fear and anxiety vanished with my mistake.
The Dharma Door of Guan Yin
Then the Thus Come One instructed Rahula to strike the bell once, and he asked Ananda, Â“Did you hear that?Â”
Ananda and the members of the Great Assembly all said, Â“We heard it.Â”
The bell ceased to sound, and the Buddha again asked, Â“Do you hear it now?Â”
Ananda and the members of the Great Assembly all said, Â“We do not hear it.Â”
Then Rahula struck the bell once again. The Buddha again asked, Â“Do you hear it now?Â”
Ananda and the Great Assembly again said, Â“We hear it.Â”
The Buddha asked Ananda, Â“What do you hear and what do you not hear?Â”
Ananda and the members of the Great Assembly all said to the Buddha, Â“When the bell is rung, we hear it. Once the sound of the bell ceases, so that even its echo fades away, we do not hear it.Â”
The Thus Come One again instructed Rahula to strike the bell, and he asked Ananda, Â“Is there sound now?Â”
Ananda and the members of the Great Assembly all said, Â“There is a sound.Â”
After a short time the sound ceased, and the Buddha again asked, Â“Is there a sound now?Â”
Ananda and the Great Assembly answered, Â“There is no sound.Â”
After a moment, Rahula again struck the bell, and the Buddha again asked, Â“Is there sound now?Â”
Ananda and the Great Assembly said together, Â“There is sound.Â”
The Buddha asked Ananda, Â“What is meant by Â‘sound,Â’ and what is meant by Â‘no sound?Â’Â”
Ananda and the Great Assembly told the Buddha, Â“When the bell is struck there is sound. Once the sound ceases and even the echo fades away, there is said to be no sound.Â”
The Buddha said to Ananda and the Great Assembly, Â“Why are you inconsistent in what you say?Â”
The Great Assembly and Ananda then asked the Buddha, Â“In what way have we been inconsistent?Â”
The Buddha said, Â“When I asked you if it was your hearing, you said it was your hearing. Then, when I asked you if it was sound, you said it was sound. I cannot ascertain from your answers if it is hearing or if it is sound. How can you not say this
Â“Ananda, when the sound is gone without an echo, you say there is no hearing. If there were really no hearing, the hearing nature would be extinguished. It would be just like dead wood. If then the bell were sounded again, how would you know?
Â“What you know to be there or not there is the defiling object of sound. But could the hearing nature be there or not be there depending on your perception of its being there or not? If the hearing could really not be there, what would perceive that it was not?
Â“And so, Ananda, the sounds that you hear are what are subject to production and extinction, not your hearing. The arising and cessation of sounds cause your hearing-nature to be as if there or not there.
Â“You are so upside-down that you mistake sound for hearing. No wonder you are so confused that you take what is everlasting for what is annihilated. Ultimately, you cannot say that there is no hearing nature apart from movement and stillness and from obstruction and penetration.";
~ Shurangama Sutra
Water is round in a round receptacle and square in a square one, but water has no particular shape.
People often forget this fact. People see this and that, they discriminate existence from non-existence;
and then being caught in these entanglements and becoming attached to them, suffer in consequence. If
people would only give up their attachments to these imaginary and false discriminations, and would
restore the purity of their fundamental minds, then both their true minds and their bodies would be free
from defilements and suffering and they would know the peacefulness that goes with that freedom.
- Surangama Sutra
Let me give you an example cc,
There is a pain in my body.
The original and only real awareness of it happened instantaneously without any input or efforting from the mind.
You could actually say that the pain is the awareness.
However, the mind kicks in a millisecond or so later and reacts. It says "damn that hurts, and where did that come from" and then it says "oh yeah that's the hip acting up again". There is awareness, intelligence in this seeing but this seeing is seeing from a specific perpective which appears to be separate from the pain. That why we say "I have a pain" instead of "I am the pain".
( I can just see Breeze posting back that "I am a pain". lol )
So, what I was saying is that the ego's reflective quality, of being able to look back on reality or on appearance is what makes us think we are separate.
If we didn't have that ability to look back on let's say, our body, then we wouldn't be conned into thinking we are separate beings.
Our thinking processes seem to have evolved to the point where they "took on a life of their own" and made an identity out of themselves.
It's truly fascinating to think about this.
Please go bang a wall, and then tell me what you feel.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
I mentioned this twice or thrice... pain. Pain is real (as long as the mind does not objectify it). But no self feels it. I think thrice.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Please go bang a wall, and then tell me what you feel.
Undeniably the brain is an important function for sensory input and output messages from the brain. But is that all to consciousness? Maybe not so. You may want to read the new article I posted in 'Brain Waves of Enlightened People'... and here's another one:Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Thank you for your accurate answer.
Originally posted by concerned_man:The Boy with No Brain
This is a well known case that throws a challenge to modern science. It's the case of Professor John Lorber and the student with no brain. Professor Lorber was a neurologist at Sheffield University who held a research chair in paediatrics. He did a lot of research on hydrocephalus, or water on the brain. The student's physician at the university noticed that the youth had a slightly larger than normal head, and so referred him to Professor Lorber, simply out of interest. When they did a brain scan on the student they saw that his cranium was filled mainly with cerebrospinal fluid. The student had an IQ of 126, had gained a first-class honours degree in mathematics, and was socially completely normal. And yet the boy had virtually no brain. This is not just a fabrication; research has found other people with no brains. During the first world war, when there was such carnage in the trenches of Europe. Soldiers had their skulls literally blown apart by bullets and shrapnel. It is said that the doctors found that some of the shattered heads of those corpses were empty. There was no brain. The evidence of those doctors was put aside as being too difficult to understand. But Professor Lorber went forward with his findings, and published them, to the great disturbance of the scientific community. Billions of dollars are going into research on the brain. Current views hold that imbalances in the brain are causing your depressions, your lack of intelligence, or your emotional problems. And yet here is evidence that shows you don't need much of a brain to have an excellent mind.
A doctor friend in Sydney discussed this case with me once. He said he'd seen those CT scans, and confirmed that the case was well known in the medical community. He explained that that boy only had what was called a reptilian brain stem. Usually, any baby born with just a reptilian brain stem, without the cortex and the other stuff, will usually die straight away or within a few days after birth. A reptilian brain stem is not capable of maintaining basic bodily functions such as breathing, heart or liver. It's not enough to keep the higher brain functions going. It's not enough for speech, not enough for intelligence, certainly not enough for being an honours student in mathematics. This doctor said, "Ajahn Brahm, you wouldn't believe the problem that this is causing in my field of science. It shatters so much past research. It is challenging so many drug companies that are making billions of dollars in profits". Because dogmatic scientists can't understand how a person with virtually no brain can be intelligent, they are just burying the findings at the back of the filing cabinet, classifying it as an anomaly. But truth just won't go away.
The Mind and the Brain
As soon as you start to include the mind, this 'ghost in the machine', in the equations, scientists tend to become discomfited. They take refuge in dogma, and say, "No, that cannot exist". I really took the Sate Astronomer to task over such dogmatism in science.
As far as Buddhism is concerned there are six senses. Not just the five senses of science, namely sight, sound, smell, taste and touch but in addition the mind. From the very beginning in Buddhism, mind has been the sixth sense. Twenty-five centuries ago, the sixth sense was well recognised. So this is not changing things to keep up with modern times; this was so from the very beginning. The sixth sense, the mind, is independent of the other five senses. In particular the mind is independent of the brain. If you volunteer to have a brain transplant with me you take my brain and I take your brain I will still be Ajahn Brahm and you will still be you. Want to try it? If it was possible and it happened, you would still be yourself. The mind and the brain are two different things. The mind can make use of the brain but it doesn't have to.
Some of you may have had out of the body experiences. These out of the body experiences have recently been the subject of mainstream scientific research. Out of the body experiences are now a scientific fact! I like to stir people up by saying things like that. Recently I saw that Dr. Sam Parnia, a researcher from the University of Southampton Medical School, has given a paper, stating that consciousness survives death. He said that he did not know how it happens, or why it happens, but, he says, it does happen. His evidence was gathered from people who have had out of the body experiences in his hospital. Dr Parnia, investigated and interviewed many, many patients. The information which they gave him, as a cool headed scientist, said yes, those people were conscious during the time they were dead. What was especially very convincing was that often they could actually describe to the doctor the medical procedures that were done during the time when they were clinically dead. They could describe it as if they were looking at their body from a position above the table. But how that happens Dr. Parnia can't explain. Why it happens he can't explain. But other medical findings also support the above. Finally, their findings replicated the work done earlier by Dr. Raymond A. Moody in the United States.
The evidence proved to those hard nosed doctors that out of body experiences do happen. But how could they happen? If we agree that the mind can be independent of the body, then we have a plausible explanation. The brain doesn't need to be functioning for a mind to exist. The scientific facts are there, the evidence is there, but a lot of scientists don't like to admit those facts. They prefer to close their eyes because of dogmatism.
WelcomeOriginally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Thank you for your accurate answer.