Jonesboy

What is it that has the will to go from the Dharmakaya to the Sambhogakaya?

There is still something that goes from equipoise to post equipoise.

Not really.. A Buddha talks, forms words, writes and listens to others. It is a present moment thing.. not a thing of the past. Something is listening, writing and talking in the present moment. The attachments are empty.

Meant to edit my post.. If there is experiencing.. something has to experience it

I get you CT I guess my point is this. There is a unique being that experiences that dreamlike world, that has realized the constant flux of energy. The Buddha said no Self but that doesn't mean there isn't a something that experiences or has realized it.. be it Universal, Primordial.. however you want to say it. Who/what is creating Pure Lands?

That is AV.. silence yet what is experiencing that silence

Sure there is no Rex, attainment is a trap.. Yet there are Buddha's..are there not? Or are you saying the goal of Buddhism is really to return to emptiness a cessation and all beings and things are a projection of an obscured mind. Yet, why is a Buddha around and giving teachings? Why doesn't he just cease once realized? What is giving the teachings to other beings?

Sure, you have two Buddha's in perfect pure perception..what are they seeing and referring to? The Buddha talked about previous Buddha's before him.. who or what was he referring to? If you were to achieve Buddhahood.. There would be no rex, that is just a thought that you are trapped in to.. what is then projecting your form, what is keeping you in this form to help others?

There are Buddha's, not just one, or a collective consciousness that projects out Buddha's as needed. They see all beings as Buddha's.. so what are they seeing and referring to? I would also agree that there is no soul, no Tom, a being in some place made up of things..

Just to me there are different Buddha’s of various depth. Each are unique and when working with them they hit different areas. Cross traditions and you can really experience the difference. To me this is a fact. A demonstrable fact. There is an old picture thread around here where Jeff merged some Divine beings to various pictures. If one is able to feel energy you can feel the difference between each one. There are other ways of demonstrating such things but that would take working with someone, some trust, etc... With that being said I guess there really is no point, just having a conversation, learning some Buddhism and sharing some of my views and practices.

This seems different than ones aspirations. More like a limitation. Sravaka-Buddhas (Pali:Savaka-Buddhas): gain Nirvana, but attain Enlightenment by hearing the Dhamma as initially taught by a Samma-Sambuddha. After attaining enlightenment, Sravaka-Buddhas might also lead others to enlightenment, but cannot teach the Dharma in a time or world where it has been forgotten or has not been taught before, because they depend upon a tradition that stretches back to a Samyaksam-Buddha.

Yes they are different and dependent on the realization have limitations correct? I believe I have read where one type of Buddha can have the realization but no abilities. The definitions seems more to do with their realization than the needs of those around them. Some choose not to teach at all or are limited in what they can teach.

Are we each unique bubbles of consciousness or nothing? Is consciousness a thing? With consciousness I am referring to say Buddha Mind.

What about this. Buddhahood is different. Here is a list of the different types of Buddhas. http://chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/Three_types_of_Buddha A Pratekya Buddha from what I have read achieves Buddhahood but doesn't have the same abilities. "According to the Theravada school, paccekabuddhas ("one who has attained to supreme and perfect insight, but who dies without proclaiming the truth to the world")[2] are unable to teach the Dhamma, which requires[3] the omniscience and supreme compassion of a sammāsambuddha, and even he hesitates to attempt to teach."

There are many types of Buddha’s right? What do you think makes up the various types?

I would agree, with the nothing other. It is all you. One with everything and everyone. Each of us is unique with regard to our make up of obstructions, clarity and range. Merging is realizing there is no separation. Yet there are differences from one being to the next, from one Buddha to another as I mentioned earlier. It is those differences that get hit or worked on allowing you to clear out issues/obstructions. Nothing is done outside of oneself, it is all you, all within you, you are not separate from any being or any thing. The deeper that realization the deeper the oneness or one with nothing other you could say.

Of course, one mind or multiple minds?

Then help me out. If a Buddha sees others as Buddha’s who is he seeing if not other beings?

That doesn’t really answer my question 😊 Sounds more Bhramaisk if you ask me. Just one Universal Mind with processes so it can experience itself. Is that what you are saying?

In Buddhism is there a you and a me? Not local mind you and me but two Buddha’s or anyway you want to look at that? Is there only one being or are there multiple beings?

Ahh, what is the title of this thread? Maybe something along those lines.

Didn’t say it was an issue, just interesting. I guess nobody else does, okay.

From the previous discussions about a Buddha and differentiation it seems the Buddha can see the suffering and from personal experience relate. If I am missing something please let me know. I quote Buddhism a lot as you have pointed out because I find a lot of truth in Buddhism. At the same time I think it has some limitations. An example would be this thread on guru and merging which would be much more in line with Kashmir Shaivism and is very different than Buddhism. You will never see anything in Buddhism where a guru can merge another with a divine being for example. While the thread continues I did find it interesting that nobody commented on my recent post about Norbu working with guardians and dakinis.

How about, I didn't fully understand your question and did my best to answer it while at the same time admitting I was wrong in my previous posts.

And this part? Seems like differentiation and knowing to me.. How? Mind to mind.. But as has been pointed out, how it actually is, isn't a differentiation.. With that being said.. my path isn't Buddhist.. but it is nice learning something and correcting a misunderstanding with regard to Buddhism.