“6. Coming to recognize the evolutionary monad’s activities of observation and manipulation within/of the causal triad envelope, the triad atoms contained therein and their aggregate envelopes of incarnation is not the end goal.”
I hope you may be able to retain motility of mind without the use of a crutch of intellectualism. 
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;59393]Sarva,
Perhaps you are absolutely ignorant of what the word Buddha means. It does not refer to Gautama Buddha, his name was Gautama Siddhartha. It is a word that can be used to refer to anybody who has come to realize their own original nature. There is nobody and nothing in existence which is not a Buddha, because there is nothing which is not of one and the same original face. The only difference between the sage and a so called ordinary person is that one is aware of it, the other has remained unaware of it. One is moving with least resistance with the current, the other is constantly walking in friction against the current. But as far as their inner dimension is concerned, there is absolutely no difference between the two - and it is not through some kind of special and extraordinary condition that a man comes to his enlightenment. Whether awake or asleep, one still has to hear through one’s ears, see through one’s eyes, and walk on one’s feet. Even if you travel miles upon miles to the top of an Everest, whether it is at the top of the Everest, or the bottom of the valley - you are still face to face with one and the same present moment. And it is this integration with the present moment which is the only thing which is capable of bringing you into communion with existence. There is nothing otherworldly about it. Because most are incapable of living in communion with the moment, man’s conditioning is so rigid and stubborn, now we have to practice all kinds of methods and techniques to make you more willing to surrender. That you are surprised that I have stated that I am a Buddha reflects that one is still in darkness as to one’s own nature. From first to last, there is nothing which is not the Buddha, or the Tao, Brahman, Atman, Anatman, or whatever other words you want to use for a lack of better words.[/QUOTE]
Amir is telling the truth…
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;59274]Hi Kareng,
One question.....why do Masters tell student Buddhists to seek out the inner Guru, knowing the risks?
I do not know what Buddhist masters tell their disciples as I am not a Buddhist. But ordinarily, the inner guru can mean many things to different people. That is when when you asked the question, I asked what you meant by it. Because to some, it can simply mean your true nature itself. For others, it can mean a specific aspect of ones own consciousness from which wisdom arises. Most of thesafeapproaches in the yogic sciences give you a safe approach to go directly to the source. Rather than focusing on so many different parts of you and trying to bring them into balance - you can just go straight to the source. That is one approach, and that is not my approach. For Jnana Yoga - the way of Union through knowledge, the intellect is emphasized as the approach towards liberation. For Bhakhti yoga, the way of Union through devotion, ones emotion is used as the means towards awakening. For Karma Yoga- it is physical and selfless action. For Raja Yoga - it is concentration upon a single point. But all of these approaches only work on using one part of your being ,developing it, and using it as an instrument to come to your awakening. As far as I am concerned, those are what I call the safe approaches to awakening. Yes, even through these methods you can contact your inner guru, because in one way or another they all awaken your intuitive intelligence. But as far as balancing every part of your being together, so that the head is not in conflict with the heart, or the heart is not in conflict with the head, or the instincts are not struggling with the heart or the head, that is a different matter. You can be awakened - but still the various parts of you are not integrated.
Is there anything else you can add Amir, out of genuine interest, I would like to know your experience in this..
All that I can say is that once you start working upon every dimension of your being, and seeking to bring them into balance, you are basically getting involved in what is more or less occult work - which has much to do with developing siddhis which are of various different kinds and using them as tools towards enlightenment. In the East, it has taken the form of Tantra Yoga. That is why in Tantra Yoga - every chakra is developed and brought into balance - because what it means is basically you are developing and bringing into balance different aspects of your own consciousness. So everything - both the so called good and the so called bad is to be accepted, understood, and integrated - nothing can be rejected or repressed. It is a holistic approach to man. All of the other approaches, though they bring you to your awakening, are not holistic - they only focus upon one part of you. That is why they are so safe, it is because they are not capable of creating imbalances in your personality in the way that the other methods are capable if you are not careful.
These different aspects of your own consciousness are often experienced as beings which seem to have their own personality. It is really not different than what happens in a dream when you encounter a certain person. In one way or another, that person represents a certain part of your own mind. So through these methods, you may experience several beings of different kinds - some pleasant or unpleasant. In the case of Gautama Buddha, one being which he encountered was Mara. Mara, for him, represented all of the collective forces of ignorance which keep one in a deep sleep. This is also why Patanjali, in his Yoga Sutras, has said that Ishvara, the Lord, will appear to the disciple in the form which is suitable to him. Because depending on your own identifications, the form will be different. If you are a Buddhist, you may see Buddha. If you are a Christian, perhaps Christ. If you are a Hindu - perhaps Krishna, or Shiva, or Vishnu. The form will change depending on your identifications. The Hindu will never see Christ or Krishna, he has no space within him to create such a thing. Jesus Christ had an experience of Satan in the desert when fasting for forty days. These are all just different examples of how different parts of your own being can present themselves to the ego, which if one is not absolutely mindful, can create great sources of suffering for the disciple.[/QUOTE]
Amir…Thank you for your post…I hope you may find this an interesting point.
It does not always follow that a person will see the inner Guru in a format that the seeer may be familiar with. I can only state this from experience.
I am mixed race, Father a Sikh, Mother English…raised in London, voluntarily went to a Christian Church. My brothers were both Sunday School teachers and older than me…I knew NOTHING about Buddhism, Hinduism and very little about Sikhism. I was present in a conversation and heard at the age of 11/12, that we had a third eye. Being young, I was intrigued privately and that it was normal to have this third eye and that it was just me not knowing about it…and it was my Father correcting my brother who was home from University studying theology…my brother told my Dad they had been studying some nonsense about the third eye, my father corrected him and briefly told him how it is done…,…and being young I also believed my Father without question.
My huge surprise was after practising one method, single focus directed down to the tip of the nose where you will see a tiny light, keep focus, and eventually the light gets bigger and then you begin to ‘see’…this is ALL I have done, the surprise was I would see ‘Buddhist’ sights…and the inner Guru, a Buddhist…so it definitely does not follow what has been stated.
My other method which for the sake of description is simply Happiness…I only do what I know will lead to happiness and when I am confronted with something unpleasant…I dont let it become a never ending tustle in my mind…I find the solution as quickly as possible…I minimise my practice to make it as simple as I possibly can…I am simple, happy to be simple…an air head, part time, when I am not working…just simple and practice simply…
Another interesting point is that the 'experiences do not match my Sex…
For example…I have seen the dancing girls that Buddha saw and when I read this in a book later, I realised why I had seen them…this happened when I was in a meditative state and didn’t realise it and was thinking of a situation I had just experienced that day where I was…lets say being flattered by a man…so I had accidently allowed this into the stream of meditation which produced a ‘sight’ of one dancing girl, an Indian dancing girl and very beautiful…but really it should have been a dancing man…ha!..anyway the point is that what you see appears to be from another life maybe, in my case, where I was a man and a Buddhist maybe…I really don’t know…this is the only conclusion I can come to…It was easy to dismiss the dancing girl, I noted her and moved past the scene to the next…and that is what you have to do, move past the scene with determination…which considering the dancing girl is to keep you tempted it doesn’t work if you are a woman so I see this as a very positive aid…
ALL of Buddhas sights that describe battles, Mara, etc are third eye descriptions…they are scenes that he had to dismiss…and some of these scenes are …scary so you have to also overcome fear of what you see!!
Something I am curious about…I know to dismiss all scenes I am presented with…yet we do not dismiss the inner guru …why? I know this sounds weird to ask…
What you are describing is not all that unusual, actually - in fact, it is all very common. Some have called it “astral sight”, others call it “clairvoyance” (which is really quite a misnomer, actually, because there is nothing “clear” about it)… what you are describing are the objective forms on the emotional plane (48 ), forms representing: your personal desires, fantasies and/or imaginings coming from the active self-conscious activity of the monad in that particular envelope (48 ) or even the mental envelope (47 - seeing as activity in this higher envelope can/does affect the lower emotional envelope - thus, the reasoning behind many raja yogis to focus on mental development, alone), from the sub-conscious complexes of memories, and/or the super-conscious envelopes with their requisite kinds of consciousness. However, that is not all, for these forms can also be the forms created by others desires, fantasies and/or imaginings coming from the self-conscious activities of the monads in their respective envelopes or even the sub-conscious complexes and/or the super-conscious envelopes, collectively or otherwise. Even more so, these forms can actually be living things, appropriately understood, ranging from the newly dead whom have just shed their physical vehicles and now stand in their emotional envelopes to elemental devas and nature spirits; those whom work with the matter aspect of reality.
As to the battles: the thing you need to grasp here is that, generally speaking, all of these forms are illusive; they are not the goal. It is a most unfortunate thing that just so many people, upon awakening this sight, seem to think that they have arrived when nothing could be further from the truth. As with the physical vehicle, we can still make a crystal-clear distinction between:
A). The knower
B). The instrument of knowledge
C). The field of knowledge
D). The object of knowledge
Which reveals, to the astute observer, that one must needs go further.
Do not become entranced by beautiful images.
As per “The Vision of Adonai”, the lord or the inner guru: this is a particular experience in which the custodian of your higher envelopes, a solar deva (a Buddha [46], in fact), comes to you in the form of your desire. It is also but a step along the path.
How will you know it’s true? Well… that’s the problem with the emotional plane, isn’t it? Go further!
Enough for the moment.
Thanks for your time.
I thought clairvoyance was being able to see future events like nostradamus could?
That precognition - clairvoyance is able to see far away objects with your mind or see things like ghosts, auras etc
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;59723]That precognition - clairvoyance is able to see far away objects with your mind or see things like ghosts, auras etc[/QUOTE]
no you’ve just described ‘remote viewing’ and ‘astral vision’.
Yeah, it’s the same thing 
Clairvoyance is the old name for it.
I see. Well you have bested me once again.
but this is what my Dictionary App on my Mac says
clairvoyance |kle(ə)rˈvoiəns|
noun
the supposed faculty of perceiving things or events in the future or beyond normal sensory contact :
I’ve ascribed the meaning ‘to percieve future events’ to the term clairvoyance for a while now.
I would like to point out that when you exercise the Ajna chakra, you automatically develop intuitive and clairvoyance and such like abilities. I only know these things recently really. I have explained that my practice is extremely simple and I have done this for 40 years.
Its because I am on this Forum that I have shared my experiences openly. I have ALWAYS been very silent and private about my on-going practice. This is not because anyone around me would mind, it is because you are drawn into explanation and over focus of your experiences when you start explaining this n that to other people. It is a I have firm belief that the less in your head, the better…
The goal is not to draw attention to anything. …I am serious in that I obey the golden rules for the presence of the inner guru according to Buddhism…No Meat, No Killing, No sexual thoughts or actions, No Lieing, No stealing…
Regarding Buddhas use and description of third eye sights…I have read a tiny amount that told of things Buddha had encountered visually. When I read about the dancing girl/s that I had seen one of, I realised that Buddha was using the third eye…
After you have seen what you have seen, you should give it nothing more than minimum attention. It should not become an obsession and is an indication of what slipped into a mediation that was on your mind or is a weakness you haven’t mastered yet, etc.
Meeting the inner guru and awakening him to the brow is when you are noticeably aware of your intuitive abilities. The Ajna is open permanently at this point and your ‘mind’ is at peace, a satisfying peace and contentment with yourself that lasts while he or perhaps she, is present…you have to DEVOTE at this point…
The inner Guru can appear without finding him…in front of you…how well you are not thinking and how balanced you are, is how much bigger he will grow, an indication of your progression…
Getting past the scenes you see without mental interruption is necessary when you are using the third eye…you just note and dismiss…this must apply if you ‘meet’ relatives too…note and dismiss…or to anything you see…EXCEPT…the inner Guru which you will know. Fear has to be overcome and this is very important because what you see can be intimidating and you must still note and dismiss…so in the visual realm, this is a consideration…However, my experience of this is minimal, thank goodness!
I can only assume that my reason for my sights being Buddhist in nature, is a previous life perhaps as one??..I should be seeing Christian images if I go by what I grew up with and where I was born, meaning the most influence growing up was Protestant one that I knew about. Remember, Father a Sikh, Mother English Protestant…
…It is most obvious that the term clairvoyance needs to be clarified - even though it technically translates to clear-seeing; how ironic is that.
Clairvoyance, as a term, is much like enlightenment - it means a great many things contradictory or otherwise, all at once. There are even people who think clairvoyance and telekinesis are one and the same thing, this is how confused they are as per the term and it’s meaning. In truth, it simply means any type of sight that is not the norm at a given time be it seeing auras, seeing events remotely, seeing the forms of emotions and thoughts - a great many things, in so far as they are related to the objective sense of sight.
Thus, like enlightenment, there are various kinds of clairvoyance - one for each and every type of matter/consciousness/energy. Thus we have physical sight, physical-etheric sight, emotional or astral sight, mental sight and causal sight; each of these is a kind of clairvoyance, albeit the term actually refers to causal sight specifically, in that it is the only sight that does not necessarily lie - hence clear-seeing.
Each type of clairvoyance has particular characteristics depending upon the matter involved. For example: physical-etheric sight is largely just an extension of physical sight - a seeing of finer aggregate states of physical matter. This sight, highly developed, is akin to looking at the world with x-ray glasses on because the physical-etheric matters inter-penetrate the physical matter. It sounds ridiculous, I know - alas - it is possible to experience this to some degree with appropriate practice. There is alot more here… but I cannot be expected to explain everything in this single post; whole volumes have been written on the subject matter.
The second type of clairvoyance is the one most people are familiar with; it is the stuff fiction is made of - seriously. However, emotional sight is very much akin to tuning into a whole other world, for - in truth - that is what you are doing; the emotional world and it’s matters are an octave higher than the physical world, in terms of vibration. Thus, people tend to describe the most fantastic sorts of experiences ranging from flashing lights, colors, sounds, dream-like landscapes, beautiful - or hideous denizens, gods and goddesses, angels, demons, people - even unicorns and rainbow bridges. It is the world of desire, fantasy and/or imaginings, collective or otherwise. That’s not to say that it’s content isn’t real - it very much is, as it is all material. The thing is that a great deal of it is generate by us and ,thus, it has no reality content worth noting beyond material form. Let me explain: you may see your dead relatives here, but you would be wise to question, “is that really them or is are they just empty forms”? One with causal sight - true clear-seeing, then, would be able to tell the difference whereas standard emotional or astral sight cannot tell the difference. Another thing of note is that emotional or astral matter is very pliable to even the subtlest expression of emotion of thought, quickly forming and re-forming itself to meet your changing expectations. It has been described as water, fluid in terms of it’s forms. Therefore, there is a very great danger of delusion with this particular sight, because telling the true from the false here is inherently difficult with a matter that reacts so readily to our expressions. If we think we will see Buddha, we will see Buddha; if we think we will see demons, we will see demons; if we are lusting for someone, we will see them as we desire - that, and a thousand-and-one other things besides.
This type of clairvoyance does have a number of potential uses, of course. In the first case, it is indeed possible to see events remotely via this sight but not in the way that many suppose - you’re technically not - just - looking at the even, but rather are creating a funnel through the emotional or astral world, connecting two physical points in space/time. Once more, there is the tricky problem of delusion because when it is done improperly, what you see is only a figment of your imagination - activity in the emotional world; an image conforming to what you want to think is happening. It is also the type of sight which yeilds the experience of luminous, colored auras surrounding individuals that - if studied - can be used as a source of insight concerning the individuals emotions and thoughts. At it’s extreme, it is even possible to observe the forms the individual is making in/of their aura via their conscious expressions, which is what is generally meant by reading the thoughts - not a hearing of words as is commonly depicted in works of fiction, but a seeing of forms.
Alas, my concentration is waning and yet there is so much more to share… hopefully this shall prove enjoyable?
Thanks for your time.
Kareng,
‘‘Something I am curious about…I know to dismiss all scenes I am presented with…yet we do not dismiss the inner guru …why? I know this sounds weird to ask…’’
One is not to dismiss anything that arises in ones experience in the sense of unconsciously trying to repress it. Everything is to be seen and understood. But in order for things to be seen and understood, what is needed is to remain a witness without becoming identified with whatever may arise in ones experience. This ‘‘inner guru’’ is not an exception. Because where the identification of the mind arises, there arises the hindrance which prevents oneself from going deeper. The ‘‘inner guru’’ is just a limited aspect of ones being, one should investigate as deeply as possible until one comes into contact with ones original nature. And even if such a thing does happen to arise in ones perception - again, whether pleasant or unpleasant, remain a witness without becoming identified with whatever may arise in ones experience.
‘‘I have read a tiny amount that told of things Buddha had encountered visually. When I read about the dancing girl/s that I had seen one of, I realised that Buddha was using the third eye…I have read a tiny amount that told of things Buddha had encountered visually. When I read about the dancing girl/s that I had seen one of, I realised that Buddha was using the third eye…’’
Once should be careful to jump to conclusions too quickly as to the nature of these experiences. Certainly everything that you encounter in a vision represents an aspect of ones own consciousness. But the problem arises in its interpretation. Not everything which may appear meaningful has to have some kind of connection with so called ‘‘past-lives’’, or perhaps indicative of some great intuition - there are visions of various of various different kinds. Most of these are just recycled impressions from the unconscious, some of these may have something to do with impressions which you have inherited because of things not limited to this life, sometimes they can occur as intuitive insights about the present or what is likely to arise in the future, sometimes they are merely just your unfulfilled desires, and most of the time it is a combination of several things. That is why their significance cannot be reduced down to a single one-sided interpretation. Because the mind of man is multidimensional, there are often several dimensions involved in the experience of such visions. Just as several parts of you may be active in your waking state - emotion, instinct, intellect, intuition, memory, imagination - similarly several parts of you are active during such visions. Particularly with things which are symbolic in nature - it is impossible to reduce it down to a single phenomenon, it can be seen from countless different angles and perspectives. That is what many psychologists have been trying to do - for example, with dreams. Different psychologists have had a different approach to dreams. Sigmund Freud used to connect almost every dream to something related to sexual repression, Adler used to often reduce things to a matter of will to power, Carl Jung used to often reduce everything down to some mythological language of the collective unconscious. Perhaps, each of them has elements of truth to what they have been saying - but each is also incorrect in that they are expressing just a limited aspect of what it is they are investigating.
One should be careful to cling to any limited perspective on the matter - particularly when one does not possess an understanding as to how to verify the nature of such visions. If, for example, they are just memories of ones so called ‘‘past-lives’’, there are methods to verify this. Not only to verify it, but almost how to live it again.
Once should be careful to jump to conclusions too quickly as to the nature of these experiences.
Truer words have not been spoken LOL
OC, can you see objects remotely? Please make an attempt to see me - if I am engaged in too private activity at the time( ) please PM me. I am prepared to be impressed
[QUOTE=AmirMourad;59763]Kareng,
‘‘Something I am curious about…I know to dismiss all scenes I am presented with…yet we do not dismiss the inner guru …why? I know this sounds weird to ask…’’
One is not to dismiss anything that arises in ones experience in the sense of unconsciously trying to repress it. Everything is to be seen and understood. But in order for things to be seen and understood, what is needed is to remain a witness without becoming identified with whatever may arise in ones experience. This ‘‘inner guru’’ is not an exception. Because where the identification of the mind arises, there arises the hindrance which prevents oneself from going deeper. The ‘‘inner guru’’ is just a limited aspect of ones being, one should investigate as deeply as possible until one comes into contact with ones original nature. And even if such a thing does happen to arise in ones perception - again, whether pleasant or unpleasant, remain a witness without becoming identified with whatever may arise in ones experience.[/QUOTE]
Thanks Amir…so remain a witness even to the inner guru…
Yes, I note and dismiss to all that I see…and when it is something a bit mind blowing, intuition plays a vital role in coming to answers…
Interestingly, when i read a part of the Surangama Sutra, some of the visual representations are actually listed and they are the same for all Amir.in the Buddhist context…this was when I realised it is not an entirely individual matter/experience and that some things will be expected to be seen and are seen…But yes, a witness is the best way to say it.
[QUOTE=Surya Deva;59280]Get yourself a ball and play with it You are not enlightened, that is why you are still reading books. You still like the rest of us have to rely on book knowledge.
[/QUOTE]
SD…you are funny…hahaha
[QUOTE=Sarvamaṅgalamaṅgalā;59361]I can’t believe people even read such lengthy posts from some schizo who claims to be the Buddha.[/QUOTE]
So rude…really…!
‘‘some of the visual representations are actually listed and they are the same for all Amir’’
That depends on the source from where these symbols and images are arising. One has to understand that the unconscious is divided in two parts. One part of it is personal, containing content and impressions which one has gathered in this life. Another part of it is impersonal, which is not unique to a single individual, but which is common to the whole humanity. As the body has inherited certain things as a result of thousands of years of evolution, the same is the case with the mind.
So there are certain symbols which will be more or less the same for all - but that does not mean that there are not symbols which are not purely a result of ones own personality and its identifications. Often times, a Hindu in his meditation may have a vision of his chosen deity, because that is what he has become identified with. He may see Shiva or Vishnu, but he will never see Jesus Christ, simply because he is not identified with Jesus.
…I cannot see objects remotely in the manner thus described, SD - at least, not with any amount of accuracy worth noting. I’m terribly sorry to disappoint you, SD, but I’m not going to claim to be/have something I do not. Though I have an understanding of the mechanics behind it, I have hardly practiced the corresponding techniques - understand: I just don’t find it useful enough to waste time developing it; what would I do with it, besides amuse people with fabulous tricks? If all I wanted to do was amuse people with fabulous tricks, I’d become a stage magician and not a yogi - it would be far less work, after all.
Thanks for your time.