Is the mind bound within the mind?

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
[N.B. This is the forum that was called ‘Exploring Buddhism’. The new name simply describes it better.]
Post Reply
User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by tomschwarz » Thu Apr 12, 2018 11:45 pm

Forever? How bound is that, if the mind has no center or edge?

Hello friends, the question is about the experiences immediately following death. Is it true that our mind will be bound within itself? I mean, we often choose to/seek to divert our attention outside of our minds (videos, reading, meeting with friends, doing projects with our children, etc...). ...So does anyone agree that our experiences immediately after dieing will be completely mind-based? As in bound within our minds? And if our mind-energy was unpalatable to our mind, we could choose rebirth, for diversion, from our conflicted, unstable minds? Am I close?

If yes, then top on my list now would be cleaning house, meaning improving the mind as a place to forever be stuck in.... for example, accepting others, considering all that they do/say/percieve to/with me to be a deeply commited gift: the commitment to share experience. Then my mind could be come comfortable? Long term ?
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

User avatar
Supramundane
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by Supramundane » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:33 am

your mind is obviously not bound, Tom! very interesting theory.

unfortunately, very hard to confirm or deny.

however, it seems to me that people who are deprived of sensory deprivation do not transmigrate but instead the mind creates hallucinations. in other words, if there is no external stimuli, this is not a problem for the monkey mind: it simply creates images and stimulation from the storehouse of memories.

in fact, people put in soundproof rooms start to hear imaginary sounds, etc. Even being deprived of one type of stimulus is enough to experience hallucinations, it seems.

i too find it hard to get my head around reincarnation, karma, etc.

perhaps it shouldn't be that hard. it is strange to me how some people do not believe in evolution because they cannot fathom that at one time 'we' were as small as bacteria-like entities that evolved into more complex forms. it is beyond the ken of most people. and yet, each one of us at one time was a tiny clump of cells in our mother's womb that has grown into what we are now!

we find it hard to imagine that one day we will not be alive. and yet, science tells us that over 40% of our body is not 'us' in terms of DNA; it is foreign bacteria. we are more of a group-organism than we would care to admit.the individual is subordinated to the group, and we find it hard to believe that we are molded and our identity created by the group. like a fish in a school following the group, our thoughts and actions are more collectively-determined than we would like to admit; our identity is actually a 'group product'; our thoughts are easily swayed and planted by the group. as hypnosis shows us, we are more under the sway of outside influences than we would like to believe.

i live in Asia where, strictly speaking, the individual does not exist because he is subordinated to the greater group. perhaps this is why it is easier here to accept the idea that we belong more to the 'we' than to the 'I'.

in a way, this dynamic describes the march of western science and culture, a long 'reality check' on our place in the world to pare down the illusion of the Ego:

Copernicus: we are not at the center of the universe
Darwin: we are not king of the animals
Freud: we are not even masters of ourselves (the discovery of the 'unconscious')

This is a conclusion Gautama came to by examining his mind alone!

Evolution shows us that ants operate like a super-organism; although they have separate bodies and minds, it is merely an expedience, as they all act like an appendage of a greater group.

in the same way, our mind does not belong to us nor was it 'us' and when we die,, in an ultimate sense there is no death because 'we' were never truly alive or separate at all...

don't know if this answers your question lol , sorry got carried away:)

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by tomschwarz » Sat Apr 14, 2018 10:37 pm

Supramundane wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:33 am
your mind is obviously not bound
...
at one time 'we' were as small as bacteria-like entities that evolved into more complex forms.
yes, thank you supramundane... ...so as we explore the possible origins of our minds (and or life for that matter), would you also consider our evolution to comes from star explosions (super nova/star death) which could be the only way that our core elements like oxygen and iron are created? i mean, do you believe that we evolved from stars?

if yes....
Supramundane wrote:
Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:33 am

the monkey mind: it simply creates images and stimulation from the storehouse of memories.

...

(...Asia...) perhaps this is why it is easier here to accept the idea that we belong more to the 'we' than to the 'I'.

...then lets take asian selflessness and take it further: is there any relationship between supernovae and the human mind (in terms of direct causation)? taking the orthodox buddhist perspective, the answer is no. the mind has no origin outside of the mind, the cause of the mind is based in the complexity of the mind itself. assuming that you agree with that orthodoxy (?), how do you understand the flight of the mind into that dust of the supernova? is life itself and its origins completely separated from the human mind ?
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

User avatar
Supramundane
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by Supramundane » Mon Apr 16, 2018 2:53 am

your sentence jumped out like a thunderbolt: "we have evolved from supernovae".
i guess you are right, though i had never thought of it in that way.

but when you say that the mind creates the mind according to Buddhist orthodoxy, i don't quite follow; could you be more explicit?

in the Abidharma i believe we have a very technical description of mind; it is a dynamic of forces, a chain of events. This is opposed to the Western view which takes a locationist or functional approach. i believe you have studied Freud and so you may remember that Freud started his career studying aphasia and argued that the brain was not locked into locations for certain tasks so much and that it was more functional; i.e. some sufferers of aphasia from a car crash or major brain trauma could recover in time. Time is required for the brain to re-learn tasks and it could do so in some cases; if a speech center was damaged, the duties could be shifted to another part of the brain in some cases; this demonstrates that although specific tasks develop in specific areas of the brain, nothing stops them from developing in another area.

The Buddhist view in the Abhidharma focuses more on the dynamics of thought. Of the 5 aggregates 3 are mental. The mental relies however on the physical and vice versa. The physical is bound but the mental less so. And if we believe in reincarnation, then the mental aspects are not bound at all. i don't think there is any link with our origins ---supernovae--- except the link of causation, i.e. dependent origination. You seem to suggest that the mind is free from this? could you explain more?

i was once told, "in meditation you must go beyond the mind where you are nothing". i never really understood this. Does this mean anything to you?

MInd is all we know --- how can one go beyond?

User avatar
Snowbear
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:41 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by Snowbear » Mon Apr 16, 2018 2:57 am

Sorry - what’s a mind?

muni
Posts: 4530
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by muni » Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:14 am

"bound mind" as an identification with phenomenon like body? I-mind is suffering, bound by/locked in own confusion. Ah!



If there is interest for inspiration, the two other following talks by Khenpo Dudjom Dorjee: Luminosity and limitless possibility. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... jom+dorjee
“ Only the development of compassion and understanding for others can bring us the tranquility and happiness we all seek. ”
H H Dalai Lama

"Relax." nirvana-samsara do not stray from spaciousness.

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by tomschwarz » Mon Apr 23, 2018 10:37 pm

Supramundane wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 2:53 am


but when you say that the mind creates the mind according to Buddhist orthodoxy, i don't quite follow; could you be more explicit?

...
. i don't think there is any link with our origins ---supernovae--- except the link of causation, i.e. dependent origination. You seem to suggest that the mind is free from this? could you explain more?

i was once told, "in meditation you must go beyond the mind where you are nothing". i never really understood this. Does this mean anything to you?

MInd is all we know --- how can one go beyond?
First off i agree that we can not go beyond the mind. So my position on this thread is that yes, the mind is bound within the mind. But also the mind is seemingly without center or edge. Now you are in my mind. You control me, like a stone thrown into water dictates so much of the surface texture as well as currents and the bottom..

Yes specifically because of the fact of dependent origination, i feel like both a bacteria (lazy, enjoy warmth, moisture, food, etc..) and i feel like a super nova, that seemingly absolute anihalation and creation jibes with my experience of mortality and parthenogenisis.

Hm... very hard to find a quote on this but i can tell you that his holiness the dalai lama of tibet has said, when we look to find the origins of the mind in the phenomenal world, we can not find it. Therefor the only thing that can cause the mind, is rhe mind. That is the punch line. But an intetesting, accurate, if quite cold hearted explanation of the same is section 5.1 here https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mind ... dhism/#5.1

About meditation, clear. Go beyond the (part if your) mind (that is self centered) and become nothing. That is the noble goal of being a "nobody " as in no one special, unimportant, fleck on the earth's timeline, which is a fleck on the timeline of infinite time and so on. What is there then worth doing? Cate for others. Why? Emptiness which is a funny world if loosely accurate for absolute love that is concommitant with basing all within (not only) interdependence (but also) the energy and exchange itself that underlies dependent origination and for the mind stands opposed to the three poisons such as attachment to temporary existance which otherwise should/can be seen as the infinite display of emptiness.
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by tomschwarz » Mon Apr 23, 2018 10:53 pm

muni wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:14 am
"bound mind" as an identification with phenomenon like body? I-mind is suffering, bound by/locked in own confusion. Ah!


I agree Muni bit the videos not so much, even thlugh he is right too.... he said "the natural mind is unobstructed". Ok bit what is the "unatural" mind? All of my problems like what we call obscurations and comflicted mental states could not be more natural. They are not only my nature but the nature of my mind itself.

So i woild suggest that it is better to say, we all want to be happy, true. And we often are not happy, true. And the path to stable happiness demmands loosing self centered perspective, true. Then about spaciousness or the mind becoming famiar with the mind, that is not going to come from loosing the unnatural components of the mind, but rather the vary natural hate, anger, fundemental ignorance and attachment which depress us can be countered with equally natural but much better absolute love and meditation as described by kamalashila.

Then to the contrary when you ask/say "the body?", i get it. Great point. The whole idea of "bound" comes from some corporal angst. And when i die, that body will feed the worms and flys.

So the thread is better retitled "is the mind confused/suffering within the mind?" Lets hear your answer Muni )))
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

muni
Posts: 4530
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by muni » Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:32 pm

So the thread is better retitled "is the mind confused/suffering within the mind?"
This is expressing how suffering is experienced. When I look so back to the title, that as well.

Without the two truths *not* being two ( inexpressible), what is there to say?
And what is there to add to Dharmata?

Mind suffering in nature of mind is dream, even very sad and experienced as real. That is then guided, to wake up.

When "two truths" are *not two truths*, comparisons, opposites aren't.

Nature of mind is "called" nature of mind and therefore it isn’t. Primordial is "called" primordial and therefore it isn’t. Guess there would be something what comes after, a necessity or a delusion what is add afterwards and this is perhaps dream itself? Since nothing can be add, no anything to wipe out.


http://www.thehiddenyogi.com/2017/05/pa ... en-on.html
“ Only the development of compassion and understanding for others can bring us the tranquility and happiness we all seek. ”
H H Dalai Lama

"Relax." nirvana-samsara do not stray from spaciousness.

User avatar
tomschwarz
Posts: 739
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 12:31 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by tomschwarz » Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:02 pm

muni wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:32 pm
So the thread is better retitled "is the mind confused/suffering within the mind?"
This is expressing how suffering is experienced. When I look so back to the title, that as well.

Without the two truths *not* being two ( inexpressible), what is there to say?
And what is there to add to Dharmata?

Mind suffering in nature of mind is dream, even very sad and experienced as real. That is then guided, to wake up.

When "two truths" are *not two truths*, comparisons, opposites aren't.

Nature of mind is "called" nature of mind and therefore it isn’t. Primordial is "called" primordial and therefore it isn’t. Guess there would be something what comes after, a necessity or a delusion what is add afterwards and this is perhaps dream itself? Since nothing can be add, no anything to wipe out.


http://www.thehiddenyogi.com/2017/05/pa ... en-on.html
Thanks Muni. Very well said, inspiring. And thanks for the Padmasambhava teaching. One bit from that,
... The buddha-mind and the mind of a sentient being derive from a single base, which is awakened mind. It becomes enlightened by realizing it, and one roams in samsara when not realizing it. The identity of this mind, which defies conceptual constructs, is a lucid brightness, a sheer emptiness made of nothing whatsoever, an unimpeded, vivid presence-that is the mind of a buddha. There is nothing you need to realize apart from it ...
...I have never had a clear light dream, have you? so if we "realized" our "awakened mind" which is "lucid brightness", and "umimpeded" and is "the mind of a buddha", would there remain the perceiver and the percieved? if yes, then the mind is still bound within the mind. if not, then what would samara look like/how would it be defined, when in fact it was undifferentiated from enlightenment?

of course, i know the answer to that question )). at least i think i do. i would say, no question, my gut tells me that the enlightened mind makes a geometric "inside out" kind of topological inversion, where we really do live in emptiness (no differentiation, signlessness, no origination, no cessation, etc...) and all of that conceptual truth, that infinite display, without attachment to a single state of it, is "seen" as a river of changing stuff, even those that are in it suffering, trying to fix points of interest, have this actual energy, in reality, as being only dependently originating and not having (stable) existence, not for even a moment.... ...and so on, but still lots of questions ))) maybe the most important one here, is, how will it feel to go from "the mind bound in the mind" to "the mind without a mind"? I mean, from Padmasambava's teaching to the women, it would seem like we need to get comfortable with mind without consciousness, perception, and the other 12 links, right? Like river without identity, yes?
i dedicate this post to your happiness, the causes of your happiness, the absence of your suffering the causes of the absence of your suffering that we may not have too much attachment nor aversion. SAMAYAMANUPALAYA

muni
Posts: 4530
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by muni » Tue May 01, 2018 10:54 am

Sorry for my late reply, I was too busy being deluded. :namaste:

To get comfortable with “mind without mind” ( or without consciousness only knowing things-objects) is not a thoughts’ idea thinking there is someone who need to get comfortable in some ‘naturally’ state. This is dream experience, suffering itself.
Like you say I understand familiarization. Yes?

Because fake nature (me) cannot “become” nature (like it appears-is). Dream cannot become awaken. As long as me is there, there is the mind locked projecting its’ dream landscape. Like hopped and caught in thought, thinking starts to flow; I am talking to Tom, what Tom will think about? This is duality, this is by idea me and being there Tom who is not me.

Dreaming to stand on a lake and look to the landscape reflecting in it. The one standing on the lake-perceiving the lake and reflections is experience of samsara. The inseparability of vast water-reflections metaphor has no perceiver-perception duality.

There must be grasping to 'reality' of what appears ( inner-outer phenomena) in order to be there other-others experienced. From this confusion it goes further to more confusion, resulting into the suffering by neutral, attachments-aversion => rejecting-accepting, fear-hope, friend-enemy, high-low….

But saying “nothing is without grasping” risks to start to cling to emptiness, which is then another delusion by mind. Unconditional love is automatically caring without the concepts I-verb-other. Buddhism is not a thing for 'mind', and without mind, is there a Buddhist?
“ Only the development of compassion and understanding for others can bring us the tranquility and happiness we all seek. ”
H H Dalai Lama

"Relax." nirvana-samsara do not stray from spaciousness.

muni
Posts: 4530
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by muni » Wed May 02, 2018 9:06 am


http://www.thehiddenyogi.com/2017/05/pa ... en-on.html
... The buddha-mind and the mind of a sentient being derive from a single base, which is awakened mind. It becomes enlightened by realizing it, and one roams in samsara when not realizing it. The identity of this mind, which defies conceptual constructs, is a lucid brightness, a sheer emptiness made of nothing whatsoever, an unimpeded, vivid presence-that is the mind of a buddha. There is nothing you need to realize apart from it ...
...I have never had a clear light dream, have you? so if we "realized" our "awakened mind" which is "lucid brightness", and "umimpeded" and is "the mind of a buddha", would there remain the perceiver and the percieved? if yes, then the mind is still bound within the mind. if not, then what would samara look like/how would it be defined, when in fact it was undifferentiated from enlightenment?

of course, i know the answer to that question )). at least i think i do. i would say, no question, my gut tells me that the enlightened mind makes a geometric "inside out" kind of topological inversion, where we really do live in emptiness (no differentiation, signlessness, no origination, no cessation, etc...) and all of that conceptual truth, that infinite display, without attachment to a single state of it, is "seen" as a river of changing stuff, even those that are in it suffering, trying to fix points of interest, have this actual energy, in reality, as being only dependently originating and not having (stable) existence, not for even a moment.... ...and so on, but still lots of questions ))) maybe the most important one here, is, how will it feel to go from "the mind bound in the mind" to "the mind without a mind"? I mean, from Padmasambava's teaching to the women, it would seem like we need to get comfortable with mind without consciousness, perception, and the other 12 links, right? Like river without identity, yes?

"Shariputra, in that way all phenomena are empty- without characteristics, not produced, not ceasing, not defiled, not separated from defilement's, not decreasing, not increasing. Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness there are no forms, no feeling, no discrimination's, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eyes, no ears, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no forms, no sounds, no odors, no tastes, no tangible objects, no phenomena. In emptiness there is no eye constituent through to no mental constituent and through to no mental consciousness constituent. In emptiness there is no ignorance and no extinguishment of ignorance through to no extinguishment of aging and death. Similarly, in emptiness there are no sufferings, sources, cessations, and paths, no exalted wisdom, no attainment, and also no non attainment."

(Part of Heart Sutra.)

: http://www.ktgrinpoche.org/teachings/selected-teachings
“ Only the development of compassion and understanding for others can bring us the tranquility and happiness we all seek. ”
H H Dalai Lama

"Relax." nirvana-samsara do not stray from spaciousness.

muni
Posts: 4530
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Is the mind bound within the mind?

Post by muni » Wed May 02, 2018 10:08 am

muni wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 9:06 am

http://www.thehiddenyogi.com/2017/05/pa ... en-on.html
... The buddha-mind and the mind of a sentient being derive from a single base, which is awakened mind. It becomes enlightened by realizing it, and one roams in samsara when not realizing it. The identity of this mind, which defies conceptual constructs, is a lucid brightness, a sheer emptiness made of nothing whatsoever, an unimpeded, vivid presence-that is the mind of a buddha. There is nothing you need to realize apart from it ...
...I have never had a clear light dream, have you? so if we "realized" our "awakened mind" which is "lucid brightness", and "umimpeded" and is "the mind of a buddha", would there remain the perceiver and the percieved? if yes, then the mind is still bound within the mind. if not, then what would samara look like/how would it be defined, when in fact it was undifferentiated from enlightenment?

of course, i know the answer to that question )). at least i think i do. i would say, no question, my gut tells me that the enlightened mind makes a geometric "inside out" kind of topological inversion, where we really do live in emptiness (no differentiation, signlessness, no origination, no cessation, etc...) and all of that conceptual truth, that infinite display, without attachment to a single state of it, is "seen" as a river of changing stuff, even those that are in it suffering, trying to fix points of interest, have this actual energy, in reality, as being only dependently originating and not having (stable) existence, not for even a moment.... ...and so on, but still lots of questions ))) maybe the most important one here, is, how will it feel to go from "the mind bound in the mind" to "the mind without a mind"? I mean, from Padmasambava's teaching to the women, it would seem like we need to get comfortable with mind without consciousness, perception, and the other 12 links, right? Like river without identity, yes?

"Shariputra, in that way all phenomena are empty- without characteristics, not produced, not ceasing, not defiled, not separated from defilement's, not decreasing, not increasing. Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness there are no forms, no feeling, no discrimination's, no compositional factors, no consciousness, no eyes, no ears, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind, no forms, no sounds, no odors, no tastes, no tangible objects, no phenomena. In emptiness there is no eye constituent through to no mental constituent and through to no mental consciousness constituent. In emptiness there is no ignorance and no extinguishment of ignorance through to no extinguishment of aging and death. Similarly, in emptiness there are no sufferings, sources, cessations, and paths, no exalted wisdom, no attainment, and also no non attainment."
(Part of Heart Sutra.)

Clear light: http://www.ktgrinpoche.org/teachings/selected-teachings
“ Only the development of compassion and understanding for others can bring us the tranquility and happiness we all seek. ”
H H Dalai Lama

"Relax." nirvana-samsara do not stray from spaciousness.

Post Reply

Return to “Dharma in Everyday Life”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests