/lit/ - Literature

Hold still

>>20556229
no, fuck you.
>>20556138
read the Bible

>>20556138
enlightenment isn't real and even if it was you will never be buddha and it takes thousands of lifetimes to achieve it anyway

>>20556261
This man resembles the demon of despair, you have to kill him, OP

>another Shudra trying to become “enlightened”

>>20556261
I could at least attaint first path

>>20556138
>meditate a little each day
Here is your problem. Minimum an hour a day. Also try to maintain that meditative state through a day and try keeping everything that happens in parentheses.

>>20556324
>first path
(Stream-entry, sotapanna)
Many people attains it

>>20556332
I can't, I'm trying to increase little by little but I'm stuck at 12 minutes now, around 10 minutes it seems unbearable, I'm filled with boredom, restlessness, I fall asleep, etc.

>>20556338
bro what 12 minutes? you need to get rid of your computer or your internet or both

A high ranking Freemason friend of mine reached Ataraxia with an ego death under big doses of DMT
I'll end up doing this if meditation doesn't work
But I'll only get a glimpse of the Absolute, I don't think I'll become a saint

>>20556356
Yes it is horrible, however in my good meditations these 12 minutes are quite intense, I never totally leave the breath
But right now it's really hard, I end half of my sessions angry with myself or asleep
Around 10 minutes it seems endless and I can't stop myself from checking the timer
I can't seem to make any progress, I feel like I'm never going to get used to the time, it seems endless
I get bored I fall asleep I get restless it's horrible

>>20556138
The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali

>>20556237
>>20556229
thanks for the laugh

>>20556369
if you focus on breath properly it can be extremely intense and you would be hot and sweating after 30m. only experienced practitioners should do this method. You should start by just counting your breaths. First count both inhalation and exhalation and then later move on to counting only exhalation. also try other methods beside focus like mindfulness and "just sitting" and other practices like yoga nidra where you move your focus up and down parts of your body

>Want to meditate
>Clogged nose due to cold

You can simply read for long periods of time to increase your patience.

>>20556430
Just breath through your mouth and focus on the breath in your diaphragm or do Kasina meditation..

Also get well soon

>>20556138
what /x/ has posted so far

>>20556138

>>20556138
Look into the gradual training. The Buddha always taught people generosity before the precepts. Giving money or time will weaken the urge to be selfish, and makes it easier to keep the precepts. If it's too hard to be generous, you can start by giving a french fry to a bird next time you get fast food.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/index.html
Look at the list in that link, and also the eightfold path, and always make sure that you're not ignoring early steps on the path and jumping right to the exciting stuff.

>>20556138
+ In Search of the Miraculous
+ Angel Tech or Prometheus Rising or Reality Transurfing
Practical:
+ breathing exercises, belly breathing, diaphramatic, 4-7-8
+ Lucid dreaming, yoga nidra
+ NLP, Hypnosis, Stuart Lichtman
+ Monroe Institute cds, Hemi-Sync
+ Mantra chanting, Vedic poetry, epics (most sophisticated archetype matrix of any human culture)

>>20556229
Stupid frogposter.

>>20556138
The mind illuminated should bring you to the door step of stream entry around stage 7-9

Happiness beyond thought by Gary Weber if you want the kill the ego stuff

>>20557155
very nice reccs, thank you.

>>20557155
I'm already trying tmi anon
I'm at stage 3-4

def start with "the empty mirror" by janwillem van de wetering

>>20556369
I suggest doing an online retreat with Dhamma Sukha and practicing TWIM.

For reading recommendations, MN 9 Samma Ditti Sutta is a good one. I'm currently working on learning it by heart.

cast your books aside, take some magic mushrooms in a forest setting and u will experience the enlightenment u seek

>>20556138
Igobo.

>>20558382
*iboga bwiti initiation

Bump

>>20556369
Fuck psychedelics bro. Sober enlightenment >>>> drunk enlightenment

>>20558773
But you can't see things with meditation

Bump

Try reading something by one of the modern indian sages. It seems like you are too caught up in concepts.

>>20559392
Like Ramana?

>>20556138
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

I'd suggest you read Buddha is as Buddha does(Lama Surya Das) and Becoming enlightened(Dalai Lama).

Don't beat yourself up about not being able to meditate for long periods of time. It is an advanced practice and is very hard.

>>20559524
Sure

>>20558861
yes you can

>>20559575
Thanks fren

Bump

The Bhagavad Gita, The Upanishads, Ashtavakra Gita, I Am That, Rupert Spira is neat

There are many ways to reach the same conclusions or experiences though. 90% of the solution is framing the 'problem' correctly

>>20556138
I keep the five precepts for newfriends but I keep 7/8 intermediate precepts because my entire society puts me into high speed upholstery and that's haram wrong livelihood. Sometimes I eat meat because there's no other choice.
I ain't enlightened I just get good grades and am good at a few hobbies.
No one knows I'm a Buddhist.

>>20556369
Holy pseud post, batman

>>20556138
Act with selflessness in mind, build habits (karma), and pay attention to how you're thinking and acting.

Read the Way of Bodhisattva by Shantideva

>>20556138
It’s a meme and not real.

No book or post or teacher will help you. What you need to do is to do nothing, except profoundly. There’s no learning it, you just do it. There are those who know how and those who don’t, nothing in between. All learning and working towards enlightenment is simply getting rid of the things that are keeping you from doing it. In other words, setting the stage for it. After that you either do it or you don’t, it’s your choice. It’s your choice entirely in fact. There’s no luck or talent or skill or divine revelation involved. If you think you want it but don’t have it then you simply haven’t made the decision to acquire it yet. It’s right in front of you within in an arm’s reach and always has been since you came into being. Since you actively separated and distanced yourself from it. It’s still right there. Yet you cry about not being able to attain it. What do you really want? Who are you really?

>>20561237
And yes, that includes this post. More meaningless garbage to dismiss.

>>20561237
based

>>20561249
cringe

>>20561237
Mostly correct, except that a book or teacher can help frame it correctly so to speak, using pointers

>>20561237
A sharp knife cuts the meat in ease. A dull one cuts the users.

>>20561266
>cringe
It’s true though. At the end of the day my post is just words. There is no permutation of words that will set you free. Wordcelling was the first great cuckening of man.
>>20561358
Refer above

>>20561458
Sure, of course that's a given when we're talking about this stuff. It will not set you free. However, I think are ways to be coaxed into the right state to have the experience. If you are too caught up in your self / objective reality and need some help shedding those things so that 'it' may be recognized at all. Asking the right questions, getting out of the cage of thoughts, etc. Whatever. At the end of the day it will not come from words or anything tangible. That is correct, but ultimately you need to be exposed to the idea one way or another otherwise you will not direct yourself at 'it'. Intellectual / conceptual understanding is sometimes an important step even if the end result is not of the mind...

>>20561539
As Thomas Campbell says, it can be an onramp to the bigger picture. It is not the bigger picture

>>20556138

>>20556369
Are you meditating sitting or lying down? Try getting a zafu, kinda hard to fall asleep sitting on that. Also try letting go of expectations. Goal seeking is poison on any spiritual path. As the tibetans say: meditation - isn't. Getting used to - is.

When boredom and restlessness rise up, pay attention to the bodily sensations that make it up. Let them be.

>>20556138
anon, enlightenment doesn't exist, when you take large doses of psychedelics u just got go schizo mode and become an annoying asshole

Take it from me and my personal experience, u will never reach enlightenment, ur fucked in this life and can do only two things; live or die

>>20556138
By asking you several fundamental questions...
>Who are you? Deeply inside
>Who Created you? With certainty
>What is your purpose? Corageously

After you answer these three questions in your mind, your soul floats free

>>20562196
The Vedantic philosophical insight that your being and all that ever exists, has existed, will exist, has been, is, and ever will be, the soul and consciousness of every living thing, shares in Your Being, the one, eternal, all-pervading, omniscient, omnipresent Being, which is Brahman, is not a merely psychic and mental experience of sensory overload, synesthesia, and psychedelia as can be reached through a drug state.

Similarly, the Buddhist insight that the “self” cannot ever be objectively pointed to as an “object”, an objective distinctly defined entity, “be” simply a body, an emotion, or a thought or set of thoughts, a consciousness — since, by nature, what it observes, it is detached from and not strictly limited to simply being what it is observing, in the same way that if you can look at your fingernail, it is inane to say, “My self can be defined and encapsulated in that fingernail I am observing — if someone asks me what my ‘self’ is, I can simply say, ‘It is my fingernail’” — also put in an other, more famous way, that an eye cannot see itself and a hand cannot grasp itself, a flashlight cannot turn around and illuminate itself — this is not merely a drug-insight, either.

The Vedantic insight is, “The truth ‘I am Brahman’ is the primordial truth behind all that ever was, is, and could be.” The Buddhist-insight is, “Why even call it ‘Brahman’”? Functionally, great and authentic sages of both traditions end up sounding rather similar.

>>20561740
judging a tree by its fruit, i would advise people to avoid Indian mysticisms . you could distill all of there teachings into a single paragraph. they say the same thing 100 diffrent ways. classic gas-lighting culture imo

>What to read to reach enlightenment?
Nothing. Meditate and contemplate on your own, without any external aid whatsoever. That's it.

>>20562432
Disagree. Start with the 'Jeets. Avoid the westoid

>>20562403
To put it another way, there is no way to imagine what you could call the “noumenon” or thing-in-itself in a Kantian sense — a thing, a truth, apart from an observer observing it, or a world apart from a world-maker, an apparent ego or entity who projects the perception of a world which it actually is of the same essence of. No “I am” without a perceived world for the “I am” to even perceive itself as existing at all — whether it is the physical sensory waking world, the dreaming subtle world, or a state of apparently timeless spaceless contentless awareness in deep sleep — and no “I am” without the world it is perceiving and experiencing so that it can sense that it is (“I am”) in the first place. Behind any possible situation, experience, or “truth” you can imagine, this “truth” or experience does not exist without the experiencer (“I am”) there to experience it, to lay claim to it. Hence, to use strange phraseology, “I am” is in all cases necessarily the world, the truth behind whatever interpretation of, experiencing of, and truth of or about whatever world you are imagining. “I am” is always “the world” and “the world” is always “I am” — neither of which are hard objects like a round sphere or rock you can hold in your hand and rather clearly, distinctly ascertain, weigh, measure, and list qualities of, but which, rather, blend into one nameless thing which is both and neither, simultaneously being the truth behind “I am” and “the world,” behind and beyond subjectivity and objectivity, the false subject-object dichotomy. None of this requires drugs to understand.

>>20556369
>I'll end up doing this if meditation doesn't work
You don't get it anon. Psychs work if you use them meditatively. Don't separate these things, they're meant to go together.

>>20562479
One word which has been used to refer to this primordial phenomenologico-ontologico-existential insight about the in-all-cases unity between “I am” and “the world”, the self and the world it perceives as apparently being “outside” of and “apart from” itself, is samarasa, Sanskrit for one-taste, or same-taste.

>>20562403
Good post. Thank you brother

>>20556138
You can't get there through reading, only through experiential investigation.

>>20562426
the most solid rec otherwise

>>20562403
You're missing a crucial distinction.

Vedantic philosophy posits a ontological realist account of the self/atman (the soul). Its the same thing as the Christian/Jewish/Muslim soul. The one that's inside your body, the one that separates from the body at death, and joins heaven/Brahman. The vedana philosophy is based around this notion. The whole non-dual tradition is that separation from the Brahman is an illusion. That is not saying there's no soul, but rather individual souls are part of the greater brahman. The brahman is omniscient, ever present, everywhere, etc and you're just a small piece of it. In essence, we have an alien cosmic ghost that is part of a greater ghost body, but is split up into multiple pieces and each one has taken over human bodies on Earth and continue to take over human bodies on earth in a cycle of reincarnation.

The Buddhist insight is there there is no such thing as a self/soul/atman that is ontologically rooted. Its not in the body. Its not outside the body. There's no ever present omni-self/omni brahman ontologically. Instead they say the only thing there ever was are hosts of relations between physical things. Every person is made up of physically changing bodies with a conscious that is ever changing. The conscious themselves are physically tied to our sensory organs so there is no "self" ontologically tied anywhere. Hence what we have is not "selves" as ontological ghosts, but mere temporal relations between physical objects and events that paint a very malleable image/mirage of what constitutes as a person when we refer to each other. In context of each person being a relational mirage of others, we get a weird sense of "greater mirage" that could be in vague and weak sense be comparable to the notion of a greater Brahman the hindus believe in. Because, you know, all people are "reflections" or relationally contextualized against the backdrop of every other people.

>>20562886
Also, for the Buddhist, the relational mirage of a personhood, does not leave the body, since the mirage of the personhood is only ever a mirage and nothing more. So there's no person inside the body, nor a person that leaves the body at death, nor a person that joins a greater self, etc. What is important ultimately here is that relational circumstances that make up a personhood mirage. Thats very important in relation to rebirth cycle.

>>20562886
>In essence, we have an alien cosmic ghost that is part of a greater ghost body, but is split up into multiple pieces and each one has taken over human bodies on Earth and continue to take over human bodies on earth in a cycle of reincarnation.
>Hence what we have is not "selves" as ontological ghosts, but mere temporal relations between physical objects and events that paint a very malleable image/mirage of what constitutes as a person when we refer to each other.
Important.

>>20556138
Read the lost gospels, then read post modern philosophy through a theological-gnostic lens and you will find what must be destroyed in order for the world to return to paradise

>>20562929
>what must be destroyed in order for the world to return to paradise
this post oozes ngmi in every word

>>20558773
>Sober enlightenment >>>> drunk enlightenment

imagine thinking there is a single iota of difference between enlightenment and enlightenment

Bump

>>20556138
>What to read to reach enlightenment?

>>20556261
the real truth about it is no one really knows why the real truth about it is we're all supposed to try.

>>20562403
no... just be honest with urself that u overdid the shrooms and LSD anon

>>20562403
>The Vedantic insight is, “The truth ‘I am Brahman’ is the primordial truth behind all that ever was, is, and could be.” The Buddhist-insight is, “Why even call it ‘Brahman’”? Functionally, great and authentic sages of both traditions end up sounding rather similar.
"If two philosophers agree, one is not a philosopher.
If two saints disagree, one is not a saint."
- Tibetan saying

Bump

>>20558861
This anon has not even glimpsed the possibilities of meditation. Of course you'd think that at the stage where you are counting your breaths. This is preparation for pure concentrated stillness.

>>20562886
Jivatman is ultimately atman though. It's only an illusion that you posit jivatman as distinct from atman, so it's not even a detached being.
>The conscious themselves are physically tied to our sensory organs so there is no "self" ontologically tied anywhere.
Also Buddha literally explicitly denies this in the Samyutta Nikaya (the advanced doctrine) and Digha Nikaya. You're relying on misreadings by Mahayana Buddhists who explicitly contradicted Buddha's teaching.

>>20556237
>read the Bible

Have you realized that modern "Jews" are not the Israelites and are really the Edomites? And that the Edomites are the Synagogue of Satan who will rule the world in the end-times, mentioned twice in Revelation? And that God destroyed the Israelites completely and ended their bloodlines by destroying their paternities after killing the blessing from Isaac, which was Jesus Christ?

I can prove it with one word: Revelation.
I can prove it with one book: Deuteronomy.
I can prove it with one number: 144,000.

I read the Bible.

>>20556338
>I'm filled with boredom, restlessness, I fall asleep, etc.
Yes those are thing to overcome. You also should find it calming in the basic sense. It's meant to be engaging.

>>20556338
>I'm filled with boredom, restlessness, I fall asleep, etc.
Yes those are thing to overcome. You also should not find it calming in the basic sense. It's meant to be engaging.

>>20556369
>A high ranking Freemason friend of mine reached Ataraxia with an ego death under big doses of DMT
This is just delusion and being convinced of something. Not actually anywhere near enlightenment. It's like someone being convinced their body is made of glass. It is not in fact made of glass.

>>20564244
So how should someone be properly convinced of something?

>>20556369
>I read he's a Buddhist

https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymartin/2019/03/31/chow-yun-fats-charity-move-why-the-action-star-will-donate-his-700-million-fortune-to-charity/?sh=3f4ca2305d9b

But this single act proved more of an ego-death...than your Kabbalah-loving Jewish go/non-Jewish-Jew secret society useful idiot for (((them))).

>Let's see your friend make this much money and do this.
That's right, I didn't think so.
>rubs hands.jpg

Your Kabbalah friend worships merchants.

It's not about experiences, definitely not your experiences, definitely not simulated experiences. It's always been about how you treat other people. Always has been.

>>20564248
What? That has nothing to do with what I said. People taking drugs and being convinced of something is not trustworthy because the drugs put them in a state of basic delusion. Their mind is warped and heedless. They are fed ideas in the subculture that lead them to it, and they believe it will get them somewhere. They, in this drug-addled state, cannot reliably evaluate this much less with all this prior belief about enlightenment, ego death, and what they'll see. It has nothing to do with enlightenment. Maybe worthwhile in the hands of someone who already has a disciplined mind and knows what they're doing and hasn't be inoculated into silly subcultures. But why would you when you can do it properly and not risk it amidst highly salient and meaningful nonsense.

>>20556229
Inconceivably based

>>20564279
What does enlightenment feel like, what does it accomplish, what can you do with it?

>>20562886
The sense of the personal soul being a separate being from God/Brahman is an illusion

>>20564294
link below is a zen monk on what enlightenment is good for

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jzdYzu2236Q

Jed McKenna's Theory of Everything: The Enlightened Perspective

>>20564211
>Also Buddha literally explicitly denies this in the Samyutta Nikaya (the advanced doctrine) and Digha Nikaya. You're relying on misreadings by Mahayana Buddhists who explicitly contradicted Buddha's teaching.
No, re-read those texts again. My wording may have been bit too strict, but the meaning remains the same. All of our consciousness are based upon physical sensory, but just based upon it, but its a direct consciousness for which the physical sensory organ creates in relation to the objects of our sensory. Hence, they're "physically tied."

These are both supported in the various suttas and the abhidhamma's understanding of the system.

>>20564837
>All of our consciousness are based upon physical sensory, but just based upon it, but its a direct consciousness for which the physical sensory organ creates in relation to the objects of our sensory. Hence, they're "physically tied."
There is a passage evidently contradicting that model in the Bahuna Sutta of the Pali Canon where Buddha says that he remains dwelling with 'unrestricted' awareness after freeing himself from, dissociating himself from, and being released from the aggregates including the aggregates of consciousness and perception. If all awareness is ostensibly created or produced by the sensory organs then it's kind of contradictory to describe yourself like Buddha does as remaining with 'unrestricted awareness' after freeing yourself from and dissociating and releasing yourself from the sensations and the relational-consciousness produced by them; that he still remains with unrestricted awareness after separation from them strongly implies that the unrestricted awareness is unproduced by them. Furthermore the very word 'unrestricted' implies that this awareness is unproduced by them as well because a dependent-consciousness that arises on the basis of the eye or mind will be restricted to that type of consciousness i.e. visual-consciousness is restricted to visual data produced by the eye. 'Unrestricted' implies its not restricted by the bounds of the mechanism producing it like eye consciousness being restricted to visual data etc

>Freed, dissociated, & released from ten things, Bahuna, the Tathagata dwells with unrestricted awareness. Which ten? Freed, dissociated, & released from form, the Tathagata dwells with unrestricted awareness. Freed, dissociated, & released from feeling... Freed, dissociated, & released from perception... Freed, dissociated, & released from fabrications... Freed, dissociated, & released from consciousness... Freed, dissociated, & released from birth... Freed, dissociated, & released from aging... Freed, dissociated, & released from death... Freed, dissociated, & released from stress... Freed, dissociated, & released from defilement, the Tathagata dwells with unrestricted awareness.

>"Just as a red, blue, or white lotus born in the water and growing in the water, rises up above the water and stands with no water adhering to it, in the same way the Tathagata — freed, dissociated, & released from these ten things — dwells with unrestricted awareness."

https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.081.than.html

>>20564996
The sutta is asking about what sort of awareness is there for an enlightened person. Its not establishing any ontological statement about the nature of consciousness. Its thus asking about a "first person" account.
Take a look at what is not said, how does an unenlightened person experience consciousness? With restricted awareness, restricted perception, restricted fabrications, etc etc etc Thats how a normal unenlightened person is. From a first person perspective. You can't use that to argue that Buddha supports the assertion that there's a person that is restricted on an ontological sense. That part has always dismantled with various suttas establishing the foundational Buddhist mode of reality via skandha.

>>20564996
>via skandha/anatta/etc
etc

>>20556229
Based and zen-pilled
>Anon got punched in the face
>Anon was enlightened

>>20565026
>The sutta is asking about what sort of awareness is there for an enlightened person. Its not establishing any ontological statement about the nature of consciousness. Its thus asking about a "first person" account.
Do you mean to say he is providing a phenomenological description of how an enlightened person experiences awareness or that it is a metaphor intended to convey a phenomenological description of that?
>Take a look at what is not said, how does an unenlightened person experience consciousness? With restricted awareness, restricted perception, restricted fabrications, etc etc etc Thats how a normal unenlightened person is. From a first person perspective. You can't use that to argue that Buddha supports the assertion that there's a person that is restricted on an ontological sense.
That's a non-sequitur response which doesn't really address the points I raised about that Sutta contradicting the view of Buddhism you were presenting. My argument was not that "there's a person that is restricted on an ontological sense" as you said and nor was my reasoning for this that unenlightened person have restricted awareness. I never said that this unrestricted awareness was a 'person' established ontologically. I'm simply pointing out that it's questionable to assume all awareness or consciousness is produced or dependent on organs according to Buddha when Buddha himself describes himself dwelling with unrestricted awareness while he's been released and dissociated from the aggregates and the reason why this position is questionable is because if that awareness is utterly and wholly dependent on the aggregates then its seemingly contradictory for that awareness to remain for one who is 'freed from released from and disassociated" from them and also because the 'unrestricted' nature of it implies that its not delimited by any specific intentional object such as ear-consciousness produced by the ears would be delimited and restricted by the intentional object of sound according to the Buddhists model. If this awareness is not restricted into the form of any of the aggregates like 'mental-consciousness' produced by the mind or 'taste-consciousness' produced by the mouth then there is no reason to consider it as produced from those aggregates as if it was produced it would be linked to that producing organ by conveying specific things like sound etc that would turn it into a 'restricted awareness'
>That part has always dismantled with various suttas establishing the foundational Buddhist mode of reality via skandha.
The Buddhist tradition and western scholars both disagree among themselves about whether the skandhas are an ontological claim about how reality functions or just a phenomenological description of human experience. To just assume an ontological claim is being made by that which would allow us to dismiss what is implied by the surface-meaning of the Bahuna Sutta about unrestricted awareness is just begging the question

>>20565180
Yes, its asking about the phenomenological description of the status of consciousness/awareness for the enlightened. Ofcourse we all know that without delusions and with cultivation of the mind, the mirages disappear and hence a clear conscious experience appears as is.

>if that awareness is utterly and wholly dependent on the aggregates then its seemingly contradictory
Thats why I said its likely my fault in conveying the meaning/words properly. In the suttas there are clear instances of how a consciousness comes to be, namely through the interaction of the physical senses in relation with the sensory object in question. This isn't considered a restriction by the Buddhists themselves atleast not for the main discources, as they don't ascribe to a higher consciousness thats outside the body in the first place or trapped in the body. The restrictions have always been about the mind's restrictions/inability to not being able to see what is real due to the self-grasping natural tendencies of human mind. There are some limits to this line of arguments later on in Buddhism as it leads to questions about the nature of knowledge.

>The Buddhist tradition and western scholars both disagree among themselves about whether the skandhas are an ontological claim about how reality functions or just a phenomenological description of human experience
You're right. But I have come up my a decent understanding of Buddhist works which show that Buddhism has both of these two modes of talking about reality. The conventional phenomenological reality as we experience and one as they are ontologically. And the Bahuna sutta fits within the ontological framework of question imo.

Bump

>>20556138
"The vital spirit belongs to heaven, the physical body belongs to earth: when the vital spirit goes home and the physical body returns to its origin, where then is the self?" - Huainanzi
(Also rec pic related, as well as the other Daoist classics)

>>20565258
Also to add, the distinction between phenomenological aspects of describing what it is to be conscious and what the reality is, is also at the heart of the various mahayana schools. Its ironic that I'm arriving at the mahayana's position just from my pali suttas understandings.

>>20565276
^Cleary translation, btw, found in "The Book of Leadership and Strategy"

>>20565258
>Of course we all know that without delusions and with cultivation of the mind, the mirages disappear and hence a clear conscious experience appears as is.
To interpret the unrestricted awareness that is described as separate from the aggregates in the Bahuna Sutta as referring to the mental aggregates themselves being purified of delusions and thereby becoming 'unrestricted' makes little sense as an exegesis because that special awareness in the Bahuna Sutta is contrasted to the aggregates as something separate from them by the usage of such descriptions as 'freed from' and 'disassociated from' and by the simile in the sutta about the lotus leaf (awaress) above the water (aggregates) that is untouched by it; it cannot be referring to the aggregates being purified from delusion because the aggregates of sensation and consciousness and fabrications that would still make up the remaining 'undeluded mind' free of delusion are themselves what the awareness is described in the Bahuna Suttas as 'disassociated and freed' from. Furthermore he says in the Bahuna Suttas that this unrestricted awareness is freed from death and aging, but the aggregates of someone who is not deluded anymore would still age and eventually die

>>20565385
The unrestricted awareness is in reference to the dispelling/dissolution of the the self-grasping, aka the tathagata, where by there is merely conscious streams flowing from the senses and the mind. Without the superimposition of the self when you think/act/speak, the consciousness is clear/free from the restrictions. Hence, the free from aging/death/etc as they no longer have hold any power over the phenomenological reality. So this enlightened phenomenological reality is now 1:1 in relation to the ontological no-self, anatta. This is what the description of reality for which awakened conscious is pointing towards.

>>20565448
>Hence, the free from aging/death/etc as they no longer have hold any power over the phenomenological reality.
To clarify this point further, the consciousness that's free from death/aging is not referring to an actual undying ontological consciousness that's trapped in the body or anywhere outside. The baseline consciousness that's physically tied to our sensory organs, that arises in contact with sensory objects, in a live flow of awareness, is still the baseline truth.

Bump

>>20565579
So we're still mortal and nothing changed
Kek what an absolute
I prefer the vedantic True Self
Make also more sense

>>20566437
If I had a wish, I'd prefer Christianity cause you know, all powerful god is better than true self. Yahwah would be able to destroy the Brahman with a snap of his finger.