bija Posted November 2, 2008 Report Share Posted November 2, 2008 [ATTACH]1867[/ATTACH]Is it always compassionate to speak the truth of one's mind (in critique)? Here are my thoughts. Sanskrit words can have various meanings. Citta: this word can mean psyche. It is said by a certain siddhi, someone elses psyche can be seen. Vritti: Can mean attitude. It has been said that the deeper purport or more correctly, attitude of something, cannot be read by the same siddhi. For example we may understand the psyche of something, by its movement, words, expressions, behavious etc. But we may not have such depth of vision of why something exists (its attitude or purport). That we can only speculate from our own mind experience (citta). The attitude has been developed over an inconceivable period. The psyche is more relevant to a shorter cause and effect. The citta has sometimes been called heart, because the mind stuff colored by the modes of nature paints itself upon the heart. When we make critique of someones religious faith or felt spirituality, is it compassionate (considering the above)? Do we really understand the purport of the religious tradition, or the vritti of someones spiritual makeup, and why it exists at all? Thoughts are always considered. I am a seeker of harmony and truth - I am not this body and mind, it is only a shadow of reality. These words may only be shadow too? Therefore seek the essence! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bija Posted November 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 a further thought... If we can penetrate the subject of the matter, by deeper vision, we can then see beyond the psychic field. Such a state of consciousness has various terms, depending upon the tradition, and the modality of transmission of thought. For example buddhists of the Tibetan tradition have called the pure mind - the mind of compassion - bodhi citta. That is one example and pointer toward a clearer vision. It is interesting to note, if our mind is operating on a lower strata, the realm of conflict can be more evident in the psyche, even if not evident in the conscious awareness of psyche. With an intellect developed to a certain extent from that lower strata, one may identify more with subtle aspects of mind. But this still is not the pure mind of compassion, mentioned in the named tradition. Now, here is something very interesting, if by some good fortune we can begin to perceive the spiritual strata, the essence or attitude - then the lower strata's of anothers mind or one's own mind, no longer exist as defect or afflictive in nature. But instead they manifest to the pure heart as expressions of beauty. As outer fields of the essence, the essence which is saturated by beauty and charm. We can begin to relish the other and see them in very deep and clear way. The culmination and beatitude of this is transcendental Krsna consciousness. From that vision true compassion may arise. For the sincere spiritual seeker such a process can be a cultivation. An ongoing sadhana that requires time and effort daily. Once we become aware of such truths, the intelligence of the organism will begin the processing work that need be done. Such is the power of thought, epsecially thought that has its origin in the deeper aspect of being. It has been said for the enlightened soul, all is enlightened, pure, and full of bliss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.