12-28-2010, 12:00 AM
"Having uprooted the craving that leads to becoming."
"having uprooted"...how the hell does one do that
how will I know I have done this. Chlorella
Chlorella,
That is what we have been exploring in this magnetic. We are more accustomed to the word craving in regard to strong desire towards something sensual and pleasurable. It takes us a little by surprise when used in regard to something more subtle such as "becoming" though it is not really any different.
You ask, about how to accomplish this "uprooting of craving", in this case in regards to "becoming" and how it could be confirmed. Before we can draw close to this we must first take a look at how the craving "got rooted" in the first place. After all that is what the phrase, "Having uprooted the craving that leads to becoming" is pointing us to.
To become, implies a movement, a transition, a transformation, change etc. from something or state to another thing or state etc. EG He ate too much and became fat. After not eating for awhile she became hungry. The caterpillar became a butterfly. The child became an adult. The law breaker became a felon etc.
Now notice the phrase we are exploring does not mention a craving for becoming or a craving to become although eventually THE craving we a are concerned with here may be expressed in such ways.
From a Buddhist perspective.... If we do not know the nature of reality then this ignorance will lead to craving. If we know the nature of reality the craving will cease. So why would this ignorance of reality produce the craving in question?
This is usually where the consideration/inquiry for most of us breaks down because the words we hear about this emerge when the craving has already ceased. Then the dialogue tends to be dialectic.
Let me try and put it in my own words again. When we experience ourselves as a subject "in here" surrounded by objects "out there", whether physical, mental, energetic etc. we will experience and impulsion even a compulsion to give account for not only the objects "out there" but also ourselves "in here". The extent to which we involve ourselves in this will vary. Science, existentialism, philosophy and religion offer fields of study. Whatever the case after a mild or acute assessment of our situation we arrive at a working knowledge of our situation and how to proceed within that situation. Some may never really give it a moments thought again after that.
The objects we encounter around us are usually considered "real", substantial and inherent. At the very least they are considered solid. It is only recently that science is showing us otherwise and even then the idea that things are not solid or as real as they appear is met with resistance.
When we do not see the objects around us for what they really are it is because we are craving. But what is it we are craving? We are craving inherent substantiality but are looking for it in all the wrong places. Take any object literally any object, we automatically impute an inherent substantiality to it. It "happens" so fast most are not aware of this impulse. It requires acute investigation as to why and how we do this.
As I have mentioned before a mirror is a great example. We do not impute inherent substantial existence to individual objects that appear in a mirror. We know they are reflections. Yet as soon as we look around at the objects that are being reflected imputation takes place even though what we take to be actual objects are as empty as their reflections in the mirror.
When we look closer at the mirror and the objects appearing. We seen that there is only one reflection. The objects of no actual substance appear to be multiple but in actuality there is just one reflection and the reflection is inseparable from the mirror. Primordial awareness is just so. We are looking at what Buddhists call Dharmadhatu (it is not a thing). Primordial awareness knows this dimension as the continual inconceivable expression in which the multiplicity appears. But these objects are not actually there as inherent. There is nothing distinct or individual about them other than an appearance. For example, it is not that I am in a car driving down the road at 30 mph. But rather all that only appears to be taking place within awareness.This is what primordial awareness knows or sees, this sameness.
This is not an intellectual apprehension. The absence of inherent objects is what is actually seen. When this reality is seen even a flash of it the craving to impute individual inherancy to objects that don't actually have any, ceases. Conceptual proliferation ceases and all accumulation spontaneously releases. My first taste of this was a relief! IT WAS A RELIEF! It all stopped! (The confirmation)
Primordial awareness knows this emptiness. Nothing actually happens in this sameness, how could it? This is not a void.
"having uprooted"...how the hell does one do that
how will I know I have done this. Chlorella
Chlorella,
That is what we have been exploring in this magnetic. We are more accustomed to the word craving in regard to strong desire towards something sensual and pleasurable. It takes us a little by surprise when used in regard to something more subtle such as "becoming" though it is not really any different.
You ask, about how to accomplish this "uprooting of craving", in this case in regards to "becoming" and how it could be confirmed. Before we can draw close to this we must first take a look at how the craving "got rooted" in the first place. After all that is what the phrase, "Having uprooted the craving that leads to becoming" is pointing us to.
To become, implies a movement, a transition, a transformation, change etc. from something or state to another thing or state etc. EG He ate too much and became fat. After not eating for awhile she became hungry. The caterpillar became a butterfly. The child became an adult. The law breaker became a felon etc.
Now notice the phrase we are exploring does not mention a craving for becoming or a craving to become although eventually THE craving we a are concerned with here may be expressed in such ways.
From a Buddhist perspective.... If we do not know the nature of reality then this ignorance will lead to craving. If we know the nature of reality the craving will cease. So why would this ignorance of reality produce the craving in question?
This is usually where the consideration/inquiry for most of us breaks down because the words we hear about this emerge when the craving has already ceased. Then the dialogue tends to be dialectic.
Let me try and put it in my own words again. When we experience ourselves as a subject "in here" surrounded by objects "out there", whether physical, mental, energetic etc. we will experience and impulsion even a compulsion to give account for not only the objects "out there" but also ourselves "in here". The extent to which we involve ourselves in this will vary. Science, existentialism, philosophy and religion offer fields of study. Whatever the case after a mild or acute assessment of our situation we arrive at a working knowledge of our situation and how to proceed within that situation. Some may never really give it a moments thought again after that.
The objects we encounter around us are usually considered "real", substantial and inherent. At the very least they are considered solid. It is only recently that science is showing us otherwise and even then the idea that things are not solid or as real as they appear is met with resistance.
When we do not see the objects around us for what they really are it is because we are craving. But what is it we are craving? We are craving inherent substantiality but are looking for it in all the wrong places. Take any object literally any object, we automatically impute an inherent substantiality to it. It "happens" so fast most are not aware of this impulse. It requires acute investigation as to why and how we do this.
As I have mentioned before a mirror is a great example. We do not impute inherent substantial existence to individual objects that appear in a mirror. We know they are reflections. Yet as soon as we look around at the objects that are being reflected imputation takes place even though what we take to be actual objects are as empty as their reflections in the mirror.
When we look closer at the mirror and the objects appearing. We seen that there is only one reflection. The objects of no actual substance appear to be multiple but in actuality there is just one reflection and the reflection is inseparable from the mirror. Primordial awareness is just so. We are looking at what Buddhists call Dharmadhatu (it is not a thing). Primordial awareness knows this dimension as the continual inconceivable expression in which the multiplicity appears. But these objects are not actually there as inherent. There is nothing distinct or individual about them other than an appearance. For example, it is not that I am in a car driving down the road at 30 mph. But rather all that only appears to be taking place within awareness.This is what primordial awareness knows or sees, this sameness.
This is not an intellectual apprehension. The absence of inherent objects is what is actually seen. When this reality is seen even a flash of it the craving to impute individual inherancy to objects that don't actually have any, ceases. Conceptual proliferation ceases and all accumulation spontaneously releases. My first taste of this was a relief! IT WAS A RELIEF! It all stopped! (The confirmation)
Primordial awareness knows this emptiness. Nothing actually happens in this sameness, how could it? This is not a void.