Teacher Hareesh ❤🙏🤗 I can't thank you enough for clearly articulating (with scholarly evidence) what I have been intuiting (and expressing) for many years through my decades of practice and studies of Zen, Tibetan Buddhism, and various forms of Yoga. I have of coarse understandably met with huge resistence to the notions that you give voice to in this video and its accompanying blog post. I have always felt for example that the Buddhist principle of "emptiness/interdependence" (shunya and or anatma "non-self") converges nicely if not ultimately exactly with the broader Indic ("Hindu") principle of "Atman=Brahman" (aka Shiv-Shakti "ParamShiva") IF UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY. And this view, even on its still admittedly conceptual level, has freed my limited mind from some of its troubling sticking points which has (IMO) subsequently allowed me to relax, allow these things to arise and dissipate, and just "dance" with the rythym of Shaki (as one might say). I sense my mind and body now are inevitable coming together in the heart of pure BEING, and I sincerely hope this is the case for humanity as well. Please continue your efforts 🙏
Your chanting, and reading from Sanskrit, as someone already mentioned, really propagates the call of the Teachings themselves to one to come and be immersed into... It is excatly what has been happening here since I have been listening (for days now)...
Thank you, Hareesh. I especially like it when you draw comparisons with Buddhism, because I was introduced to spirituality through Buddhism and Im still trying to figure out how it differs from Tantric yoga and where I stand on those differences, and on each of these traditions.
Really enjoyed this introduction and explanation of how this lineage bled into Tibetan buddhism...so similar to the shentong view and quite possibly identical...many thanks
Hi Christopher! I'm so glad to see you here! I'm from Brazil and recently I've bought your book in portuguese, so i really would like to say : thanks you so much.
@@christopherwallis751 right and I Sing The Body Electric was the one I really liked as a teen, reading this stuff from the heart will really knock all the particular personal preferences out of you lol, guess that was his intention..
This is pure gold. All of Christopher's work is just that. Also check out his masterwork: THE RECOGNITION SUTRAS - ILLUMINATING A 1000 YEAR OLD SPIRITUAL MASTERPIECE. Thanks sincerely Christopher.
Thank you so much for this teaching. Can you clarify the the non-dual nature of this teaching? Am I correct in understanding that all “things” have an essence (ex. Cow) while ALSO being without an independent essence (the cow is interdependent on the grass, pasture, sun, etc)? And if I am reading this correctly and taking it further, we also must deepen into our own essence while also acknowledging it is not an independent essence? I am reminded of a teaching I heard where we are so moved by parts of nature - the waterfall for example - because the waterfall is always in the process of becoming the waterfall and we are able to experience its true nature which fills us with joy and reverence. And then to add to that, there is the understanding of the essence of the waterfall while also the awareness that the waterfall is not a separate entity detached from the whole of consciousness (or perhaps if put in ecological perspective, the environment from which it is created and which it creates). Thank you again 🙏
no -- in this teaching, nothing has its own unique essence. there's no such thing as 'cow-ness' except as a mental construct. everything shares one and only one universal essence-nature: consciousness (cit). meaning to say, everything (cow, grass, etc.) is nothing but consciousness appearing as *that* . the nature of whatever you're aware of is simply your awareness of it. and there aren't objects at all, so for example 'waterfall' is itself a mental construct -- there's just *water* appearing in that way, which at a yet deeper level is just consciousness appearing in that way (as water falling).
having said that, of course our experience of cows is different from our experience of horses. that different is real. but it cannot, on this view, be attributed to a cow-essence as opposed to a horse-essence. Rather, countless factors have combined over eons of evolutionary history in such a way that Life manifests as a cow or a horse. And again, at a deeper level, it's nothing but consciousness appearing in that way. And consciousness manifests differently from different vantage points. For example, a lion will have a very different sort of experience of cows and horses than we humans do. There's no cow-essence determining our experience of cows or else everyone would have exactly the same experience of cows, and they don't. So, you don't have a unique essence either. Life expresses itself differently through you than it does through others, but not because you have a different essence. Cannot one dancer dance many sorts of dances? Cannot one actor act many sorts of roles? In this teaching, there is only one Actor, so only one Essence.
i've found this etymology: From *svobъ (“self-dependent”) + *-oda, from Proto-Indo-European *swo-bʰo-/*swe-bʰo-. Same extension in Latvian atsvabināt (“to free”), Old Prussian subs, Proto-Germanic *swēbaz m, *sibjō f, Latin Sabīnī, Sabellī, Samnium, Sanskrit स्व f (sva). it seems to be more akin to 'svabhU'
Hareesh Wallis ji, where can I find this text? I would like to read it as I listen to you but I can't find it anywhere online. Please advise. Thank you.
Christopher Wallis Thank you dear Wallis ji. I read your answer on FB, too. Speaking of FB....is there any other social network where I can always receive all of your updates? I’m not such a fan of FB and given the recent developments (Cambridge Analytica), I am seriously considering closing my account. Please advise. With sincere respect, K
I've been studying buddhism several years now and I thought the dharmakaya was primordial consciousness ie... awareness is the foundation of existence. Did I misunderstand that or did I happen to land in a mind only school (Nyingma)?
unrelated, i guess. mahAyAna occured a lot earlier (in lotus sutra, for example). mahAnaya could simply mean 'great principle' similarly to mahArtha 'great cause' (i.e., inclusive non-dual Consciouness aka the Goddess)
Fabulous. I got so much out of that, especially the rebranding of atman to 'essence-nature'. I've stuggled to truly understand atman and have instead used this exact term, 'essence-nature' to describe who we are. I'm so grateful for your clear and succinct delivery and look forward to following these talks. BTW Did you make up the melody to the verse?
850 B.C. or A.D.? I've read some things about a few different things about Hinduism and/ or Gurus and I was very puzzled that many things were written down/ written about in the A.D. era which I found to be very questionable cuz I imagined that these things would have been much much earlier. Way back in the BC era's.
A.D., for sure. well, there is stuff continuously coming down from heavens since immemorial times. but tantric stuff just in A.D era (vedic stuff some millenia into the B.C era).
30:20 : Hum ! Sorry but it doesn't sound very fair, from a historical POV, to say that Vijñanavada "agrees" with Krama about Consciousness as the ground of being. As Vijñanavada school appears between the 4th and 5th century of CE, it would be more accurate to say that Krama "agrees" with Vijñanavada about Consciousness... :-)
Teacher Hareesh ❤🙏🤗
I can't thank you enough for clearly articulating (with scholarly evidence) what I have been intuiting (and expressing) for many years through my decades of practice and studies of Zen, Tibetan Buddhism, and various forms of Yoga.
I have of coarse understandably met with huge resistence to the notions that you give voice to in this video and its accompanying blog post.
I have always felt for example that the Buddhist principle of "emptiness/interdependence" (shunya and or anatma "non-self") converges nicely if not ultimately exactly with the broader Indic ("Hindu") principle of "Atman=Brahman" (aka Shiv-Shakti "ParamShiva") IF UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY.
And this view, even on its still admittedly conceptual level, has freed my limited mind from some of its troubling sticking points which has (IMO) subsequently allowed me to relax, allow these things to arise and dissipate, and just "dance" with the rythym of Shaki (as one might say).
I sense my mind and body now are inevitable coming together in the heart of pure BEING, and I sincerely hope this is the case for humanity as well.
Please continue your efforts 🙏
Thank you
So in love with this teaching! Thank you!
Your chanting, and reading from Sanskrit, as someone already mentioned, really propagates the call of the Teachings themselves to one to come and be immersed into... It is excatly what has been happening here since I have been listening (for days now)...
Thank you, Hareesh. I especially like it when you draw comparisons with Buddhism, because I was introduced to spirituality through Buddhism and Im still trying to figure out how it differs from Tantric yoga and where I stand on those differences, and on each of these traditions.
Really enjoyed this introduction and explanation of how this lineage bled into Tibetan buddhism...so similar to the shentong view and quite possibly identical...many thanks
I’m reading your book which is great, really helps, and very happy to see you here too. Thanks
Hi Christopher! I'm so glad to see you here! I'm from Brazil and recently I've bought your book in portuguese, so i really would like to say : thanks you so much.
So thankful for your sharing this Work!
Thank you Christopher Wallis.
kind 'fate' led me to you via AUDIBLE and 'recognition sutras'... learning.
Thank you for the two different translations -- and yes, the second one worked better for me!
excellent, thank you for translating and sharing this and all the practical aspects of Tantric lineages.
Thank you!
Thank you....!!!🌷
Welcome!
Very Walt Whitman and Ralph Waldo Emerson Vibes too
love W. Whitman!
@@christopherwallis751 right…sort of a romanticized non dualistic vibe …quite cool
Whitman for sure had a powerful awakening. it's running all through Song of Myself.
@@christopherwallis751 right and I Sing The Body Electric was the one I really liked as a teen, reading this stuff from the heart will really knock all the particular personal preferences out of you lol, guess that was his intention..
This is pure gold. All of Christopher's work is just that. Also check out his masterwork: THE RECOGNITION SUTRAS - ILLUMINATING A 1000 YEAR OLD SPIRITUAL MASTERPIECE. Thanks sincerely Christopher.
Thank you so much for this teaching. Can you clarify the the non-dual nature of this teaching? Am I correct in understanding that all “things” have an essence (ex. Cow) while ALSO being without an independent essence (the cow is interdependent on the grass, pasture, sun, etc)? And if I am reading this correctly and taking it further, we also must deepen into our own essence while also acknowledging it is not an independent essence?
I am reminded of a teaching I heard where we are so moved by parts of nature - the waterfall for example - because the waterfall is always in the process of becoming the waterfall and we are able to experience its true nature which fills us with joy and reverence.
And then to add to that, there is the understanding of the essence of the waterfall while also the awareness that the waterfall is not a separate entity detached from the whole of consciousness (or perhaps if put in ecological perspective, the environment from which it is created and which it creates).
Thank you again 🙏
no -- in this teaching, nothing has its own unique essence. there's no such thing as 'cow-ness' except as a mental construct. everything shares one and only one universal essence-nature: consciousness (cit). meaning to say, everything (cow, grass, etc.) is nothing but consciousness appearing as *that* . the nature of whatever you're aware of is simply your awareness of it. and there aren't objects at all, so for example 'waterfall' is itself a mental construct -- there's just *water* appearing in that way, which at a yet deeper level is just consciousness appearing in that way (as water falling).
having said that, of course our experience of cows is different from our experience of horses. that different is real. but it cannot, on this view, be attributed to a cow-essence as opposed to a horse-essence. Rather, countless factors have combined over eons of evolutionary history in such a way that Life manifests as a cow or a horse. And again, at a deeper level, it's nothing but consciousness appearing in that way. And consciousness manifests differently from different vantage points. For example, a lion will have a very different sort of experience of cows and horses than we humans do. There's no cow-essence determining our experience of cows or else everyone would have exactly the same experience of cows, and they don't.
So, you don't have a unique essence either. Life expresses itself differently through you than it does through others, but not because you have a different essence. Cannot one dancer dance many sorts of dances? Cannot one actor act many sorts of roles? In this teaching, there is only one Actor, so only one Essence.
Just wondering, in Russian svoboda mean freedom.. can that be somehow connected?
maybe. Russian and Sanskrit are cognate languages.
i've found this etymology:
From *svobъ (“self-dependent”) + *-oda, from Proto-Indo-European *swo-bʰo-/*swe-bʰo-. Same extension in Latvian atsvabināt (“to free”), Old Prussian subs, Proto-Germanic *swēbaz m, *sibjō f, Latin Sabīnī, Sabellī, Samnium, Sanskrit स्व f (sva).
it seems to be more akin to 'svabhU'
wonderful, thankyou
Hareesh Wallis ji, where can I find this text? I would like to read it as I listen to you but I can't find it anywhere online. Please advise. Thank you.
hareesh.org/blog/2018/3/9/the-blossoming-of-your-awareness
Christopher Wallis Thank you dear Wallis ji. I read your answer on FB, too. Speaking of FB....is there any other social network where I can always receive all of your updates? I’m not such a fan of FB and given the recent developments (Cambridge Analytica), I am seriously considering closing my account. Please advise. With sincere respect, K
www.patreon.com/hareesh !
I've been studying buddhism several years now and I thought the dharmakaya was primordial consciousness ie... awareness is the foundation of existence. Did I misunderstand that or did I happen to land in a mind only school (Nyingma)?
it doesn't sound to me like you've misunderstood, but this is a very brief comment.
who is that quote from at 21 min about Love?
I have the same question. Hareesh please provide the name of the western philosopher who that quote is attributed. Thank you for this video!
Maha naya..the great Way? Doesn't that sound a lot like Mahayana, The Great Vehicle...Mahayana Buddhism. Origins of Mahayana???
unrelated, i guess. mahAyAna occured a lot earlier (in lotus sutra, for example). mahAnaya could simply mean 'great principle' similarly to mahArtha 'great cause' (i.e., inclusive non-dual Consciouness aka the Goddess)
Fabulous. I got so much out of that, especially the rebranding of atman to 'essence-nature'. I've stuggled to truly understand atman and have instead used this exact term, 'essence-nature' to describe who we are. I'm so grateful for your clear and succinct delivery and look forward to following these talks. BTW Did you make up the melody to the verse?
Thanks! No, that's a traditional melody.
850 B.C. or A.D.?
I've read some things about a few different things about Hinduism and/ or Gurus and I was very puzzled that many things were written down/ written about in the A.D. era which I found to be very questionable cuz I imagined that these things would have been much much earlier. Way back in the BC era's.
A.D., for sure. well, there is stuff continuously coming down from heavens since immemorial times. but tantric stuff just in A.D era (vedic stuff some millenia into the B.C era).
30:20 : Hum ! Sorry but it doesn't sound very fair, from a historical POV, to say that Vijñanavada "agrees" with Krama about Consciousness as the ground of being.
As Vijñanavada school appears between the 4th and 5th century of CE, it would be more accurate to say that Krama "agrees" with Vijñanavada about Consciousness... :-)
you are correct.