The Buddha Explains Universal Mind

[Rick O'Shez]

Only according to buddhish doctrine...a doctrine followed by one person who happens to be also the founder of the cult...lol...

So you're claiming that the experience of non-duality isn't an aspect of samadhi? Or that samadhi isn't a meditative state? Which?

Come on, quit the eel-wriggling! Admit that non-duality is a meditative experience and not some paranormal cosmic consciousness thingy beyond the event horizon of a black hole! ( or rabbit hole )

Don't believe the cultish propaganda of the Church of Cosmic Consciousness!

 

[YmirGF]

So you're claiming that the experience of non-duality isn't an aspect of samadhi? Or that samadhi isn't a meditative state? Which?

Come on, quit the eel-wriggling! Admit that non-duality is a meditative experience and not some paranormal cosmic consciousness thingy beyond the event horizon of a black hole! ( or rabbit hole )

Don't believe the cultish propaganda of the Church of Cosmic Consciousness!

Jeez, you go away for a day and look where things have not got to, LOL.

I wonder if anyone will actually admit that their statements about supposed "cosmic consciousness" are actually faith based claims. Given that to attain continuous experience of so-called "cosmic consciousness" one has to spend many years in preparation, one would have to have faith that that preparation was worth it. It's sort of like putting down payments on a mortgage for a house you have never seen. You take it on faith that the house will be there when the final payment is made and that it is not located in a nearby swamp.

I know this is a sore spot for our three musketeers, but I also find it a fascinating connection that all three hold Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh 2.0, errrr.... Osho... in somewhat high regard. That IS very telling. Evidently their bar of acceptability is set extraordinarily low. Jus' sayin'...

 

[YmirGF]

All this aside, if we pretend for a moment that what we are being told by the Holy Trinity who form the RF chapter of the Trans-dimensional, Inter-Galactic Church of Cosmic Consciousness, that they apprehend reality, AS IT IS, unlike those of us who are their unwashed, horrendously conditioned, human animal cousins, how does this make their life experience better?

Did their intelligence balloon upwards as a result of this experience?
Did they find that they were more able to overcome the challenges they face on this earthly expedition as a result of this experience?
Did they manage to achieve great fame and riches, like "Osho", for example, as a result of this experience?
Did they manage to defeat any pre-existing mental health issues as a result of this experience?
Have they opened any facilities that accept students to follow their wondrous path?
Have they written any books, shedding new light, onto previously hidden arcane topics for the benefit of humanity, in general?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I wonder if anyone will actually admit that their statements about supposed "cosmic consciousness" are actually faith based claims.

They clearly are faith-based claims, despite the attempts to dress them up as something else.
Cosmic consciousness looks to me like a variation on pantheism, and I find the attempts to support this idea with Buddhist teachings quite puzzling.

I know this is a sore spot for our three musketeers, but I also find it a fascinating connection that all three hold Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh 2.0, errrr.... Osho... in somewhat high regard. That IS very telling. Evidently their bar of acceptability is set extraordinarily low. Jus' sayin'...

I'm surprised anyone takes Rajneesh seriously. He reminds me of Chopra, minus the pseudo-science.

 

[godnotgod]

The universal mind is non-dual, it is realized when the mortal mind is without thought...it is the I which thinks... and without thought, there is no I to arise in the mind to be aware of the non-dual reality....universal mind...this one mind is just that...it is pure awareness....no second thing that is separate from the one mind can be one with the one mind for that would be logically impossible...

.

I find it incredible that no one seems to be realizing this simple fact: that without 'I', which is personal consciousness, the consciousness that remains present must be universal in nature. But 'I' is tricky. It re-recreates itself almost imperceptibly, and one is compelled to say: 'there is no such universal consciousness!', when it is actually 'I' that is the illusion. It takes practice and a great deal of attention to detect the split second that 'I' comes into play, but one can actually catch it in the act if one is paying attention.

It is like an ocean wave, could it speak, were suddenly to assert: 'Oh! Look at me! I know I exist, but there is no such thing as the ocean! That's just a silly notion in other waves' minds'.

 

[godnotgod]

But these pronouncements about "cosmic consciousness" and "fifth level" sound like pretentious baloney, exactly the kind of thing the Church of Cosmic Consciousness would preach.

Sermons at the CCC would also include a lot of unexplained jargon buzz-words and numerous references to "non-duality", probably also throw in some ideas from Scientology to further mystify the congregation. "Yeah, man, it's all beyond space and time, roll another one...."

I want you to tell us exactly what the doctrine of the CCC is that we are supposed to believe in. You keep harping on and on about jargon and buzz words, but fail to give us specific information. At least Xtianity makes no bones about what its members are to believe, and Zen tells us that it is a doctrineless teaching, only a 'finger pointing to the moon'. But you just give us fluff.

Vivekananda said that the Absolute was beyond space, time, and causation. Was he borrowing from scientology too?

Or is it you, putting words into peoples mouths....again!?

 

[YmirGF]

I find it incredible that no one seems to be realizing this simple fact: that without 'I', which is personal consciousness, the consciousness that remains present must be universal in nature.

Why would you assume that? Based on what, exactly?

But 'I' is tricky. It re-recreates itself almost imperceptibly, and one is compelled to say: 'there is no such universal consciousness!', when it is actually 'I' that is the illusion. It takes practice and a great deal of attention to detect the split second that 'I' comes into play, but one can actually catch it in the act if one is paying attention.

The difference is, of course, that we DO have evidence the "we" exist. There is precious little, to no, evidence that this alleged "universal consciousness" even exists.

It is like an ocean wave, could it speak, were suddenly to assert: 'Oh! Look at me! I know I exist, but there is no such thing as the ocean! That's just a silly notion in other waves' minds'.

If this were a valid comparison, it might be worthy of comment, but since it is not a valid comparison, I'll just let it die the death it so clearly deserves.

 

[YmirGF]

I want you to tell us exactly what the doctrine of the CCC is that we are supposed to believe in. You keep harping on and on about jargon and buzz words, but fail to give us specific information. At least Xtianity makes no bones about what its members are to believe, and Zen tells us that it is a doctrineless teaching, only a 'finger pointing to the moon'. But you just give us fluff.

Say what? You really are serious, aren't you. LOL.
Some might consider the following to be both pedantic and dogmatic, I quote:

I find it incredible that no one seems to be realizing this simple fact: that without 'I', which is personal consciousness, the consciousness that remains present must be universal in nature.

One gathers from your comment that you do not appreciate the nature of facts and their difference from supposition and assumptive reasoning.

Vivekananda said that the Absolute was beyond space, time, and causation. Was he borrowing from scientology too?

Who said he was right though? Can it not been seen as a somewhat dogmatic insistence? You make it sound as if it is beyond question that the musings of Vivekananda are concrete truths, proven beyond a shadow of doubt. It's just the thoughts of yet another, less than stellar, guru foaming at the mouth to his nodding followers.

Or is it you, putting words into peoples mouths....again!?

Not that you would ever usurp the words of others to inflate your narrative... nope... nev'ah...

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I find it incredible that no one seems to be realizing this simple fact: that without 'I', which is personal consciousness, the consciousness that remains present must be universal in nature.

No, the basic function of consciousness is universal in nature. Think about it. It's the mind which is transformed.

In any case the universal nature of consciousness doesn't support your belief in "cosmic consciousness". I don't know why you keep going on about Zen because your beliefs are clearly much more in line with Advaita.

And let's be clear, the Buddha didn't teach "universal consciousness", "cosmic consciousness", pantheism or Advaita.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Vivekananda said that the Absolute was beyond space, time, and causation.

Why are you quoting a Hindu swami in a thread about Buddhism? Why the continual random emission of quotes from here, there and everywhere, regardless of relevance to the discussion?

Sermons at the CCC must be very hard to follow! And to swallow!

 

[Twilight Hue]

"It's the moon stupid."
.
That's one of my favorite catch phrases in Buddhist circles.

That thing catches more egos than that dangling gluey sticky pull out fly strip my uncle used to hang up on the ceiling in the seventies. *Grin*

 

[viole]

I think, oh jeez, I'm not supposed to be thinking.....

I think you hit on an important point. IF there was a defacto "universal consciousness", in theory, reports about it would vary only a little, in innocuous ways. Given that there is no satisfactory universal consensus, which one would expect, undermines the probability of it being an existential reality.

Not necessarily. The universal consciousness could be schizophrenic.

Ciao

- viole

 

[YmirGF]

Not necessarily. The universal consciousness could be schizophrenic.

Ciao

- viole

Due to anthropomorphic projection it certainly would be in the minds of some, viole.

 

[godnotgod]

Why would you assume that? Based on what, exactly?

The absence of individual consciousness. There can only be one other choice, and we know it is not 'no consciousness', because when the notion of 'I' is not present, we are still conscious.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So you're claiming that the experience of non-duality isn't an aspect of samadhi? Or that samadhi isn't a meditative state? Which?

Come on, quit the eel-wriggling! Admit that non-duality is a meditative experience and not some paranormal cosmic consciousness thingy beyond the event horizon of a black hole! ( or rabbit hole )

Don't believe the cultish propaganda of the Church of Cosmic Consciousness!

Non-duality is not a meditative experience....there are in fact awesome meditative experiences preceding the cessation of thought....and after the reemergence of thought...but non-duality is what is realized only when the mind is still and that is not an experience that can be claimed by the I because it was not present...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, the basic function of consciousness is universal in nature. Think about it. It's the mind which is transformed.

In any case the universal nature of consciousness doesn't support your belief in "cosmic consciousness". I don't know why you keep going on about Zen because your beliefs are clearly much more in line with Advaita.

And let's be clear, the Buddha didn't teach "universal consciousness", "cosmic consciousness", pantheism or Advaita.

Your opinion....fine...but you are not the authority on behalf of Buddhism to say what is......

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Not necessarily. The universal consciousness could be schizophrenic.

Ciao

- viole

That is a trollish post....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I find it incredible that no one seems to be realizing this simple fact: that without 'I', which is personal consciousness, the consciousness that remains present must be universal in nature. But 'I' is tricky. It re-recreates itself almost imperceptibly, and one is compelled to say: 'there is no such universal consciousness!', when it is actually 'I' that is the illusion. It takes practice and a great deal of attention to detect the split second that 'I' comes into play, but one can actually catch it in the act if one is paying attention.

It is like an ocean wave, could it speak, were suddenly to assert: 'Oh! Look at me! I know I exist, but there is no such thing as the ocean! That's just a silly notion in other waves' minds'.

I like the wave and ocean metaphor....like one fish who says to the other fish....where is this ocean that I have heard so much about?

But so far as the devoted detractors here go....you can lead a horse to water, but you can not make it drink....you can point to the moon but they are obsessed with your finger...you can give them pearls and they grind them into the mud....it's in their nature... evolution will sort it out...

 

[Twilight Hue]

I am aware of the ubiquitous claims of realizing samadhi, moksha, enlightenment, etc....but I have not met one personally, so I hold judgement.... But in the event that I do have the opportunity to meet one, they will be held to account of non-dual reality...not merely the conceptual claim that you seem to buy into....

You already met one.

All you have to do is look in any mirror and notice the face that is reflected back.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You already met one.

All you have to do is look in any mirror and notice the face that is reflected back.

Shucks....you flatter me Nowhere Man...