So, how is not clinging to the three poisons not practicing indifference?
How is generating compassion towards both friends and enemies not practicing indifference?
So, how is not clinging to the three poisons not practicing indifference?
The three poisons are the cause of grasping, not objects of grasping.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 5:47 pmSo, how is not clinging to the three poisons not practicing indifference?
Indifference is often mistaken for equanimity, especially by beginners. An indifferent person will not generate compassion towards either friends or enemies. A bodhisattva may have equanimity, but they are never indifferent towards sentient beings.How is generating compassion towards both friends and enemies not practicing indifference?
Indifference can mean that.
What?PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:14 pmIndifference can mean that.
It also means not holding an opinion for or against.
Suppose a hungry stray cat shows up at your door, and you happen to have two cans of cat food. One is fish and the other is chicken. Out of a sense of caring, you want to feed the cat. Do you care which can you open? Probably not. You may be totally indifferent as far as which can is opened, as long as the cat is fed.
This shows that indifference itself has nothing to do with compassion.
Indifference towards whether the cat starves or not is a different issue.
Likewise, one can have awareness without picking and choosing, and still practice compassion.
Practicing compassion is a choice. So no, you cannot have awareness free of choices. You may not care whether you feed a cat tuna or chicken as long as it is fed, but that does not mean your action is "indifferent." The goal of feeding the cat is a choice, the food is secondary. And you do have to choose which can. The cat isn't going to choose for you.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:14 pmIndifference can mean that.
It also means not holding an opinion for or against.
Suppose a hungry stray cat shows up at your door, and you happen to have two cans of cat food. One is fish and the other is chicken. Out of a sense of caring, you want to feed the cat. Do you care which can you open? Probably not. You may be totally indifferent as far as which can is opened, as long as the cat is fed.
This shows that indifference itself has nothing to do with compassion.
Indifference towards whether the cat starves or not is a different issue.
Likewise, one can have awareness without picking and choosing, and still practice compassion.
First, here you are conflating compassion and awareness.Malcolm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:50 pmPracticing compassion is a choice. So no, you cannot have awareness free of choices.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:14 pmIndifference can mean that.
It also means not holding an opinion for or against.
Suppose a hungry stray cat shows up at your door, and you happen to have two cans of cat food. One is fish and the other is chicken. Out of a sense of caring, you want to feed the cat. Do you care which can you open? Probably not. You may be totally indifferent as far as which can is opened, as long as the cat is fed.
This shows that indifference itself has nothing to do with compassion.
Indifference towards whether the cat starves or not is a different issue.
Likewise, one can have awareness without picking and choosing, and still practice compassion.
You may not care whether you feed a cat tuna or chicken as long as it is fed, but that does not mean your action is "indifferent." The goal of feeding the cat is a choice, the food is secondary.
And you do have to choose which can. The cat isn't going to choose for you.
No.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 10:46 pm
First, here you are conflating compassion and awareness.
That’s fine, but it does not render one indifferent.Next, yes. One is primary, one is secondary. That’s the point. They are not the same thing.
Last, I could easily tear the labels off the cans and not know which is which, making the fact of choosing a moot point, just as when one generates compassion to all beings regardless of what label they have: human, animal, preta, etc.
Depend on what one means by “free.”One can rest in awareness that is free of conceptualizations. No?
Some people have this idea that “resting in a nonconceptual state” means a state of absence of thoughts. But this is a very incorrect idea. The mind is always with concepts. It’s function is thinking. Since there can be no awareness in absence of a mind, it is clear that “resting in a nonconceptual state” does not mean being in a state with no conceptual activity. It means resting in state where one is not dominated by conceptual activity. It’s not possible to stop conceptual activity. Go ahead, try. Get back to me on that.Since ‘choosing’ is a type of conceptual activity, then if one is resting in a non-conceptual state, one would not be engaged in a conceptual activity, such as ‘choosing’.
to simply rest the mind without conceptualizing things? Sorry, but I don’t find that too difficult. Just don’t try too hard. I think a lot of people who meditate can do it.
So much nonsense in this thread
I would guess that the vast majority of people doing this are simply resting in marigpa / lungmaten, which is really of no valuemuni wrote: ↑Sun Aug 22, 2021 4:28 pm
I have been looking for Krishnamurti and found a quote.
"truth beyond the boundaries of religion, ideology, or tradition, he declared that "Truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever."
I think about that we realize our delusions/ unawareness by study, technic, meditation, contemplation and so purify, but "nondual" awareness is, or Truth cannot be fabricated.
Conceptualization is the natural function of the mind. The mind conceptualizes automatically. As long as one is breathing, one is conceptualizing. Whether one is resting the mind or not, the mind goes right on conceptualizing. "Resting the mind" does not mean "rest in a concept-free state." Because people think it does, they incorrectly meditate, resulting in birth as animals or unconscious devas.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:18 amto simply rest the mind without conceptualizing things? Sorry, but I don’t find that too difficult. Just don’t try too hard. I think a lot of people who meditate can do it.
Malcolm wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:38 amConceptualization is the natural function of the mind. The mind conceptualizes automatically. As long as one is breathing, one is conceptualizing. Whether one is resting the mind or not, the mind goes right on conceptualizing. "Resting the mind" does not mean "rest in a concept-free state." Because people think it does, they incorrectly meditate, resulting in birth as animals or unconscious devas.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:18 amto simply rest the mind without conceptualizing things? Sorry, but I don’t find that too difficult. Just don’t try too hard. I think a lot of people who meditate can do it.
In the proper way of resting the mind, you maintain awareness of the ongoing conceptualization process, but through awareness of it's illusory nature, and awareness of our tendency to become confused/bound by the conceptualizations; you remain detached.Malcolm wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:38 amConceptualization is the natural function of the mind. The mind conceptualizes automatically. As long as one is breathing, one is conceptualizing. Whether one is resting the mind or not, the mind goes right on conceptualizing. "Resting the mind" does not mean "rest in a concept-free state." Because people think it does, they incorrectly meditate, resulting in birth as animals or unconscious devas.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:18 amto simply rest the mind without conceptualizing things? Sorry, but I don’t find that too difficult. Just don’t try too hard. I think a lot of people who meditate can do it.
I think we are talking about two very different things.Malcolm wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:38 amConceptualization is the natural function of the mind. The mind conceptualizes automatically. As long as one is breathing, one is conceptualizing. Whether one is resting the mind or not, the mind goes right on conceptualizing. "Resting the mind" does not mean "rest in a concept-free state." Because people think it does, they incorrectly meditate, resulting in birth as animals or unconscious devas.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:18 amto simply rest the mind without conceptualizing things? Sorry, but I don’t find that too difficult. Just don’t try too hard. I think a lot of people who meditate can do it.
There is no awareness apart from a mind that is aware. There is no skandha of awareness, there is no āyatana of awareness, nor is there a dhātu of awareness. Awareness is a mental factor (caitta, sems byung) which accompanies a mind (citta, sems).PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 1:23 pmI think we are talking about two very different things.Malcolm wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:38 amConceptualization is the natural function of the mind. The mind conceptualizes automatically. As long as one is breathing, one is conceptualizing. Whether one is resting the mind or not, the mind goes right on conceptualizing. "Resting the mind" does not mean "rest in a concept-free state." Because people think it does, they incorrectly meditate, resulting in birth as animals or unconscious devas.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:18 am
to simply rest the mind without conceptualizing things? Sorry, but I don’t find that too difficult. Just don’t try too hard. I think a lot of people who meditate can do it.