causal vehicle – Dreamyoga

Many do not know with humility where for them the known ends and the unknown begins.

Moreover, their assessment of what is known may be inaccurate in that they imagine they know more than they actually do. Anyone who has taught undergraduate science can testify that there are many students who imagine they know more than they do. They may be confident and exhibit braggadocio concerning their knowledge. They may even pass exams and imagine a mastery over a subject when in fact they have just passed an exam. A qualification is not synonymous with full knowledge. The measured knowledge is qualified to a yard stick. Knowledge begins post exam in its subsequent application. When you have to teach something in public, then you learn. Each time you teach it a new facet, previously un-noted, may be revealed. You could say that teaching is also a process of learning for the so-called teacher.

It stands to reason then, that the scale and scope of the unknown can not even be estimated. Therefore, it cannot be factored in, in a reliable way. There may be some things, concepts and states of awareness which are unknowable, particularly so while in meaty carnate human form.

You do not know what you don’t know and are, by definition, unaware of the gaping hole in your knowledge. Though you may self-diagnose prematurely as omniscient. There are many who imagine themselves smart and with wide, deep and profound knowledge of life, the universe and everything.

To give a trite example what it feels like to be dead is unknown when alive, yet because we all die, it is not unknowable because we all get a chance to experience it. The level to which we are conscious in the death state may be variable. We don’t know for sure.

In the new age literature, I encounter many who talk about the buddhic and atmic planes or awarenesses. There is a certainty in language which is not necessarily backed up by personal experience. It is for them a theory, a hypothesis and not an experiential reality. In the blue books opus direct and continued experience of these states, in the model hypothesis, is as a result of initiation and evolution.

Humans like to model in their own image and may draw glowing enlightened figures, perhaps partially because states of awareness and consciousness of highly abstract natures are not easily diagrammatically rendered. In the Ancient Wisdom traditions, the atmic “plane” is sometime referred to as the nirvanic plane, implying it is the awareness of the post nirvanic being lacking a causal vehicle having blown it off. They may fail to imagine awe and the austere nature of universe, perhaps they imagine a soft radiant glow, with comforting pastel shades. Cosmogenesis is not nice and fluffy; it is cosmic and violent beyond comprehension. The scope is far beyond human experience. We can just do our best to observe, model and understand.

For a scientist the use of the two dimensional nomenclature of plane is very unhelpful and distracting. Plane implies matter and physicality {excluding imaginary numbers}. When I have been reading these things, I find that the legacy nomenclature from the Victorian mediums and early twentieth century occultists off putting and something which I need to put to one side to get to the gist. The use of etheric “plane” instead of emotional is old fashioned.

I have seen the word Toltec described as man of knowledge and uttered with a bit of awe. I have yet to meet a so-called Toltec who can solve Schrödinger’s equation for a particle in a three dimensional box. Tens of thousands of undergraduates do this every year. There is a whopping great gap in knowledge of physics, chemistry, biology and engineering, in my opinion. They may have knowledge but it is far from complete.

Similarly, many scientists may profess profound knowledge. They may pooh-pooh magic, chakras, ghosts and exorcism. They may even soap box. I’ll wager that I could spend the wee small hours in a haunted house with them and have significantly less fear. Even though ghosts do not exist, of course. If I started to do a rite of exorcism, they would probably shit their pants.

Both groups have the unknown and the extent of it is also unknown. I could play on words and say that the extent of the unknown is the unknowable for any give life because we can only map out so much unknown in ~ 85 standard earth years.

I’ll make a statement; it is common for human beings to imagine themselves more knowledgeable than they actually are. There is an arrogance which is out of proportion with their tens of kilograms of meat measured against a planetary and cosmic scale. Yet they have trouble not being adamant and assertive about things which they know little or nothing about.

————————————————————–

Do you know where the unknown for you starts?

Have you an inkling of just how vast that unknown is for you?

If you type various versions of this question into Google you see that there are people discussing it on line. I have even seen articles on Buddhism which states that the goal is to achieve nirvāṇa. Buddhism does not have KPIs and personal development planning, nor does your line manager tear you off a strip if you don’t achieve your goals.

I’ll speculate whoever considers nirvāṇa a goal is a long way indeed from said goal. He is in a gaol of Western thinking.

In various school of thought nirvāṇa is when the causal vehicle {Soul or reincarnating Jiva} has been blown off. This means there is no requirement to reincarnate, a strictly human thing. Humans are “bound” to the wheel of rebirth. Someone, some being, who has done that, nirvāṇa, is strictly speaking no longer human. In the context at death the being who has attained nirvāṇa achieves the state of parinirvāṇa at the dissolution of the meaty incarnate form. Thereafter “they” remain formless.

We could get into the gender debate about pronouns. What pronouns do you use for some entity which has no body, no observable physical plane presence? What is the correct pronoun for a fully enlightened Buddha? It?

The problem I have with enlightenment as a concept is that is enlightenment an absolute or a relative term? It might be said that someone got enlightenment, does that mean that they are a fully enlightened Buddha or does it mean that they are little less heavy than before. They have attained a quantum of enlightenment, a bit, one step further up the ladder. They are lighter, less dark and thereby enlightened. To progress one gains enlightenment in a stepwise fashion, realisation by realisation. At nirvāṇa the being is lighter because it no longer has a causal vehicle or personality, notions of self have dissolved. It is enlightened, unburdened.

There is the concept of returning high attainment Bodhisattvas, who on death put off the attainment of parinirvāṇa and come back of their own free will to teach. Because they have no causal vehicle, they create a nirmāṇakāya emanation for such a purpose. If I understand it correctly there may be many of these in the Tulku tradition. Arhats can be seen as selfish because they do not come back. But that is a transference of human personality onto someone who has no self. I have seen it prejudiced that Bodhisattvas are good, and Arhats not so. Human folly, methinks.

In esoteric thinking the end of the causal vehicle comes at the fourth initiation. If one cross references, this is nirvāṇa or blowing off. If I understand it correctly this phenomenon is associated often with physical plane death {but not always}. One gets nirvāṇa and sharpish thereafter parinirvāṇa. In that school of thinking there are a few more stages of development, the other initiations, after doing what Siddartha did in getting planetary nirvāṇa.

One might rephrase the question, “how many fully enlightened beings are there?”

In the esoteric school of thought the fourth degree initiate goes on to take the fifth and become what some call masters. This happens, according to my reading, relatively soon.

I think most people would struggle to envision or envisage a “living” awareness or consciousness in the absence of a physical plane body. So, people invent worlds and dimensions or abodes where they might picture some enveloping form even if that be nebulous. The inventions are inspired by life on earth. Being superstitious people like signs and miracles as circumstantial evidence or proof of nirvāṇa or parinirvāṇa. There must be a rainbow or a comet. If it is a wholly natural part of evolution why would this happen? It is kind of no big deal. There is a desire for sanctity and holiness where they may just be a natural evolutionary process.

The question itself seeks to quantify and scale because people like to compare, to play top trumps.

“My God is better and more real than yours”, being a root of many wars.

Going a step further “are” implies existence or being. Can something exist if there is no form, no measurable lump of meat. If something is formless, is it?

Instead of quantifying we may now rephrase. “Are there enlightened beings?” “Do they exist?”

“It’s life Jim, but not as we know it!”

Astrobiology and astrochemistry are looking for life in a chemical-biological entity with a physical existence measurable by modern instrumentation. The assumption being that life can only exist in some kind of form, or particularly a corporeal form no matter how small. Science requires a form {and perhaps reproductive urge} as a basic component of life and its definition.

A formless Buddha after paranirvāṇa would not technically be alive according to human definition.

So maybe according to science enlightened beings do not exist.

The answer is therefore zero and not 42….

Which poses the ancillary question does, zero exist or not?

Tag: causal vehicle

The Unknown and The Unknowable

How Many Fully Enlightened People Are There?