does this mean its an object? as an object enlightenment isnt outside oneself or inside oneself. if it means turning the attention inward and forcing the mind/body connection into a higher state of being then just be this being.

in other words. you create this higher state of mind. but it is just that.

when forgotten what then?

the ultimate state is non state of mind.

clarity and crispness to see the wisdom of the eteranal now unfold before your very eyes.

...layer after layer we keep on peeling dayin & dayout... & when seeing is just seeing hearing is just hearing & so forth... no one, no person, no thing, no nothing, ...it is just what is what &  just as is & where is... any word is just a measurable tool in dualistic world... suddenly the nature of seeing hearing & so forth perhaps one day would evaporate too... leaving nothing but bright clarity sky...

That sounds sexy.

But the feelings of goodness - these are all in and for the ego. This is where meaning and joy lies.

Without someone to experience the joy, there would be no gratitude.

Once the dusty Heart Sultra indicated like so: " Form is emptiness. Emptiness is form. Form is no different from emptiness nor emptiness is different from form." Thanks~

Quote: "There is joy. There is no one experiencing the joy. There is no one being joyful. "
.........

deluded.

"Form" and "emptiness" have different connotations.

Was trying to get an idea of what the quote meant so I read this: http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/emptiness.html

Apparently "emptiness" means empty of inherent existence.

But because people experience hallucinations, this suggests that existence is solely in the mind. (The article's justification was that there is no inherent existence because of interdependence which, along with hallucinations, cannot be reconciled with solipsism).

Other than that, it's more useful (and maybe impossible not) to think the representation (whether there is an 'physical object'/essence behind it) is the thing itself.

To quote the article, "objects of perception have therefore no inherent existence". But by being "objects of perception" they inherently exist and this gives meaning to the term.

The article claims that experiencing the true essence (behind the object) is impossible. This does nothing to vindicate the personal ideal of "emptiness" - later quoting the Dalai Lama, "you will perceive phenomena and events as sort of illusory". The fancy name used for the proposed mode of perception - "perfection of wisdom" (which must be "perfected through cultivation") - only perpetuates the false idea that it is somehow beneficial. And that it is "aquired experientially, by means of intuitive insight" makes the proposition dubious - the aquisition likely a delusion rather than a perfection.

In my humble opinion, it is not the way to 'bliss' (or to better oneself in any real way), and these elaborations were, for me, merely spiritual snake oil.

nah...fell into the trap. gnawed myself free. now im free again.

no mind is crap.

it dont make sense to no one.

i dont know if im enlightened woodsy.

all i know is that which seeks it is it.

all i really care about it the end.

if enlightenment is a thing................then as a object of the attention when the attention is turned away from it does this mean your no longer enlightened?

enlightenment seeks enlightenment.

but this doesnt imply seeking isnt reguired at one point. nor does it mean dont ask questions.

for example i told someone today.

awareness is the soul.

and attention is awareness to a point.

the awareness is empty like the mind. is emptiness.

i said to them.......if you turn your mind inward ( the attention ) and examine what it is made of you will find it is empty. nothiningness. even awareness is empty.

but this nothingness cant be destroyed.

i also said awareness is differant then attention.

we hear sounds regardless if we pay attention to them or not.

that this awareness is wholeness. we hear, taste, feel and see all at once.

without trying.

attention though is used to focus the awareness.

the self to a point.

so we are already whole at the get go.

kinda what i been looking for and to me is no mind.

thats why i said no attention is enlightenment.

and i fall into the trap of being very unfocused at times.

not a good thing.

so you see no mind..........i already have it. ( awareness )

mind........got one and damn proud of it. im free with it.

i dont know things about emptiness is form and form is emptiness.

these things make no sense to me.

id rather be able to converse with the average man on the average level.

ALOT of people can see what i can see.

the end.

babies are a very good example.

maybe some here could learn from them.

Quote: "Quote: "...yes... what can we possibly learn a thing or two from a babyhood ? Does a baby have thought or intention at all?  What is his or her mind like? "
.........

What can?

"
.........

...can it be the arising thought causing for rebirthing...!? ...& what or who is rebirthing? When a new born baby begins to cling, he or she is working yet another fresh new chapter of concept...