stirling

I know what you mean, but would say my experience of "mind" at this point is that there is just what arises moment to moment. Nothing hidden, or that could be hidden. To clarify "story": Some meaning applied to a series of events that is devised by the thinking mind, having both a past and future that somehow interconnect. My experience is that the past and future are always ONLY thoughts appearing in mind now - a story having no reality in this moment.

The populace of these experiences has shifted over time, so not the same crew at any given moment. Only occasionally do I see the monks... I miss those guys. Indeed it is all Dao/dharmakaya/nature of mind/Rigpa/Self so there IS nothing to be afraid. Some of it still give me the hair on the arms standing up experience, but no actual story of fear. I love it, honestly.

No, but I had many potions years ago.

Not asleep exactly, but when awaking during the night I have had faceless monks (sometimes with swords), angels of various flavors, the dead (including babies, old people, people disfigured and/or catastrophically injured), human shaped shadow figures, and "fairies" or other natural beings in plants, etc. This includes a number of times when I have got up in the night and might be returning to my bed, fully awake. None of them are "real" in the conventional sense, or very interactive. They are often highly detailed and sometimes (monks and angels) VERY real in appearance. They don't "mean" anything either, except perhaps that I am not filtering my experience very much, though I suspect most people would want to assign some kind of story to them.

All of them... or no-one, depending on how you look at it. In more 3D terms, every teacher I have ever had or met with realization in the Zen or Vajrayana Buddhist traditions over the last 30 years or so of hanging around temples and meditation centers. What we are looking for is just being present with the world as it happens. It doesn't require a special technique, but does require learning to notice when we are "doing" and dropping that "doing" over and over again, and then resting in the stillness that follows.

It actually requires DROPPING all effort, not any sort of "doing". The unconditioned is always there, underneath all doing.

Agreed. I would say that ALL views are wrong. Just as teachings are merely pointers at something ineffable, a definition cannot completely describe enlightenment. Some definitions will be recognizable to those that have insight, however, even though they are incomplete. I advise students to hold all teachings (and indeed all events in this life) lightly - to avoid concreted and solidified views. Yes. Removing obscurations is certainly a substantial part of the main body of work for us in this lifetime, but it IS entirely possible to vanquish karma. I'm not sure I follow you here. Can you elaborate. Definitely. This is how karma presents. Our story about ourselves and the world follows us as long as we are telling it.

Here is one well-known teachers take: His picture. For what it is worth, it is my experience that it is entirely possible to realize the true nature of reality and be free of suffering. Almost anywhere there is a decent sized Buddhist center there is realization walking its halls, and speaking the dharma. Enlightenment, is realizing that all appearances have "emptiness" (sunyata) as their core reality and that "self" is a delusion caused by a mistaken perspective. You don't have to be a buddhist for this to be realized. Sufis, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, and more realize the same thing. There are no "complete" paths. A path is merely a collection of pointers that one hopes will cause the perspective shift of seeing things as they are. Buddhism just has a lot of (successful) history, structure, and variety. As Apech suggests (two answers), enlightenment is realizing that there has never been anyone to enlighten. No practice has ever precipitated enlightenment - a practice merely makes you "accident prone".

I'm not sure what the particulars are of your practice, but in Dzogchen or Shikantaza we drop the object of meditation (breath, for example) and just observe reality as it is without engaging with what arises in it, whether it be thoughts or feelings, etc. What typically happens is that sukkha and piti arise in the body and mind, which are both comfortable and blissful. Boredom only arises where there is mental activity and meditation has dropped out. The point of this meditation is that it is the same as the underlying enlightened mind, and can be used as a clear playing field for generating insight into the nature of mind, or reality. While I am sure there are documented health benefits from meditation, what is being worked on (in Buddhism anyway) is working to drop what obscures our seeing the underlying way things truly are. Insight (awakening/satori/enlightenment) sees through the reality of the body, disease, aging, etc. and is innately free of "self" and deception. This is something that can be demonstrated with a meditation instructor of sufficient realization and isn't really even complicated to see.

It has always been the form of Buddhism. In this case it is put in such a manner that you are shocked by it enough to investigate its propositions personally. From the tripitaka (earliest Buddhist teachings): The question becomes: In what conditions do the delusions of choice, suffering, and consciousness cease? It would be a misunderstanding to think that there is no compassion for the suffering of others, and no actions are taken to help with that... there is in fact MORE compassion, WITH more clarity as to the causes and conditions.

All of this is reminding me of one of the most concise but complete wisdom documents I know of. It could quote the whole thing, but I think the idea is well-represented in just this excerpt: In short, it is the attachment and aversion of the illusory self that decides that "something is wrong with the world". As Maddie suggests, where the self is seen for what it is, the nature of our struggle with the reality of what is happening is changed.

From the Atthinukhopariyaayo Sutta of the Pali Tipitaka (Samyutta Nikaya 35.152). If we are looking at Pali, I would consider: In particular I would draw attention to the bolded section. The salient question then becomes: Ignorance of what... knowledge of what? The original answer was "anatta", but the deeper answer (IMHO) is "sunyata". Of course, the Buddha is only one of infinite enlightened beings. Perhaps the simplest and cleanest expression of sunyata ever expressed was: or there is something like: There are countless worthy expressions. Deep bows to you. I have studied many available works of the Tibetan tradition, but I confess that I not really worked with subtle channels, aside from what is require to experiment with tummo. The Dzogchen path is a particular set of practices. Seen from the perspective of emptiness, entities are harmless, though I definitely get where you are coming from. Visions of angels, Buddhas, the "dead" etc. are what I have experience with. The Buddhas view is that we see such things (like all phenomena) like this: We are ultimately empty of an "I" that can truly be harmed by such things, in my experience.

I agree! I use it for that reason, honestly. I think it needs some unloading. To me it means to have a clarity or understanding, and that is how it best makes sense to me. My experience is that awakening is a first insight after which seeing the nature of things is an available perspective, but NOT a stabilized viewpoint, or complete seeing. This is when the nature of things is realized not to be a "state", but an underlying reality that is always present. Over time dualities dissolve and eventually the delusion of "self" dissolves, which leaves a very solid and permanent experience of "no-self" in all situations and moments. In the Zen traditions this is typically said to take approximately 10 years, which is when you get many people retreating to caves, etc. The question of where a siddhi would arise from is an interesting one. In my opinion, things arise where the right causes and conditions are present, but I can't say for sure what the causes and conditions necessary to precipitate siddhis would be. I DO think that having a stabilized view that has dissolved a great number of dualities creates an openness that allows for at least some types of siddhis to appear. For example: These aren't exactly siddhis, but they are the consequences of seeing through all dualities, and actively change how reality is. How this is understood and experienced is not immediately obvious, without some explanation, but very real nonetheless. I have had some success in working with various kinds of entities that has been possible with the addition of simple rituals. It could easily be that having the right ritual (and the necessary insight or mind-set) might unlock some or all of them? If I get any further, I promise to share.

I appreciate you all putting up with me. I came out of an interest in exploring how various practices in other traditions, as well as when happens as understanding deepens after insight. What keeps me coming back, though, is the humanity and camaraderie in the posts. Threads like Liminal Luke's, Maddie's personal story, and the posts of Manitou, Dwai, Apech and others. You are a good egg, Mark, but I do sometimes think of you like a terrier with a bone. I admire your determination. As far as the "hara" is concerned, I agree that it features (in variations) in some traditions, but can't point to any number of teachers who have "cracked it" that never did hara practices. I just don't think it is mission critical, but the dialoguing is still fun.

That's fine, though I wish people would ask me WHY I would say it rather than attribute some nefarious intention on my part with no grounds for doing so.

I can completely understand how the Tibetan position (and my posting it as a framework) could upset you, based on your feelings on the matter. It was honestly an unintended consequence. I DO experience some of the siddhis (depending on which groups we are talking about) and am naturally curious about the others, but haven't met any teachers of any walk of life that can reliably fly, teleport, become giant or tiny, etc. Of course, I would LOVE to meet someone like that. I have met teachers who can read minds (not volitionally) and seem to have intentions granted over an over again in a synchronistic way (myself included), and can't see any reason that any siddhi might be impossible, but it seems to me that you would need to understand a few things about the nature of things for them to present... thus my question. My curiousity is about whether or not those happen before or after insight (enlightenment). Sure. I'm interested in meeting those that have those ability and comparing notes. That truly isn't my position in the slightest. My question is about the order in which the two arise or correlate. I'm sorry you feel that way. I think you would be surprised by how many enlightened "people" there are, and what an ordinary thing it actually is. In Mahayana Buddhism ALL people are already enlightened and simply don't realize their true nature. It only takes a perspective shift to see that this is the case in my experience. I have met many people who have had this happen. I go ahead and say it because I think it is something that needs to be demystified so that people can realize just how achievable and commonplace it is. This is the motivation for me. From another source altogether: I'm sorry that we don't seem to mesh. I am happy to own my part of that, and am sorry to offend you.

Jadespear claims an attainment. I am taking that as a sincere claim for now. I'm not sure anything will be provided, which is fine. Yes, tempting - $50 for a hundred does sound like a bargain, my friend!

It seems that I am unlikely to write posts that you find satisfactory. It is honestly OK to block me if something about my posts seems to upset you, Bob.

You sound like you are taking it so personally... I merely chose a framework in order to talk about. The designations are from the framework, not mine. What tradition are those siddhis from? I'm not familiar with them. From my perspective the siddhis aren't something I am in charge of precipitating, they arise (if they do at all) in correlation with insights. I have never intended or not intended to accumulate siddhis, they have always been peripheral to my interests, and warned against by my teachers. My question to JadeSpear is a GENUINE one. If I was cynical or a liar I could have just claimed the whole suite of siddhis, but I am not, and don't. I am here to ask questions where there are gaps in my knowledge of other practices and traditions, and to find like minded people, not become embroiled in unnecessary argument. I realize that at some point you have take exception to something I have said - I hope you will accept my apology for upsetting you.

I appreciate you thinking of me Bob, but I feel that it is fine in context.

"Open awareness" is where all unlabeled, empty phenomena are the "object", which is seen, with some pointing and experience, to be no object at all. This resting isn't a state (something that comes and goes) but can be seen to be underneath ALL experiencing all of the time. This is what is meant by "primordial". When you allow the mind to come to a halt, Rigpa/Shikantaza/Open Awareness wells up to fill the space naturally of its own accord. It is the screen on which the "ornaments of emptiness" (trees, space, buses, cats, "self", bills, wars, time, dewdrops, ad nauseaum) play across.

Funny... I was all set to answer your original post then noticed the date! As both a Dzogchenpa and Zen teacher, open awareness is 100% my "thing". Where there is clean, clear, still, present awareness there is naturally emptiness that wells forth with no necessary direction or technique. In the two traditions I have trained in there IS no other practice necessary, in fact (as Dogen, father of Soto Zen says) resting in open awareness IS actualizing enlightenment.

What tradition are you working in? In Tibetan Buddhism siddhis are consider to be of two types: ordinary siddhis (like those in your list) and the supreme or uncommon siddhi (enlightenment). Do you mind if I ask if the supreme siddhi is also present in your experience, and (if so) was that before or after the others became available? Also, what are some examples of how these things manifest? I am not in any way intending to catch you out or trick you, do not doubt you, and inquire in complete earnestness and kindness. If a private message seems a better route, I'm fine with that. My personal experience is of having the supreme siddhi, but not the others so much as they are described, though "spontaneous materialization" of a sort is constant.

In Buddhism teachings come at different levels - relative and absolute: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine#:~:text=In Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā the,convention and an ultimate truth. Ultimately relative teachings are not true, but are used as a scaffolding to build understanding. Reincarnation and karma are both relative teachings, and do not point to anything ultimately real, or permanent. Just as in Buddhism, daoist realization is seeing through the delusions of these relative ideas.