stirling

It depends on the depth of your practice and understanding of reality, my friend. Does this kind of information help those that don't have those things? Of course not. Could it change YOUR experience of the world under more mild conditions? Oh, absolutely. I have many students and have met many students of other teachers from various traditions that have used their practice to transform their lives and the experience of suffering of emotional and physical pain. As for extreme examples, you COULD google "monk self-immolation" and see what sort of torture a person with dedicated training can endure. It isn't a pleasant rabbit hole, I wouldn't suggest it.

For discussion purposes, some Buddhist early traditions point to what I like to call "Non-dual 1" which refers to the insight of no-self. Later traditions point to "Non-dual 2" which is "emptiness". In my opinion "enlightenment" ALWAYS (sometimes eventually, perhaps) ends up being "Non-dual 2". "Non-dual 2" is when there is not only "no-self" in the practitioner, but ALSO when NO seeming objects/appearances in consciousness have "self" either. ALL dualities begin to dissolve on awakening, including those of time (then/now) and space (here/there). If we take "self" AND time out of the equation, what is born or dies? Whither past lives? This is where you get: Death exists in the Relative reality, but is an obvious delusion when seen from the Absolute. Both coexist, like the yin/yang. But what we truly are is "the deathless". What we truly are is the only thing that is not impermanent. It is something you are intimately familiar with, and that is always visible once your teacher introduces you to the "emptiness"/Buddha Nature/Rigpa/The Nature of Mind and you learn to return to this seeing with your practice. This simple moment of introduction, properly understood, is probably the most powerful moment of teaching any student could receive. - There are arhats all over the place. There are a number on this board, and there is often at least one even in small towns where there is dharma, though not always. I know a few in my small town of 10,000 or so, for example. They come from many traditions, and sometimes NO tradition. The way to know them is by the simple clarity of their teaching, kindness, humbleness, gentle humor and stillness of being. The method of practice is to seek stillness, and stop clinging and aversion in your life when you have been trained to recognize it. This liberates karma. Precept study is a good idea. The precepts are designed to help you focus on areas where you can stop generating karma. Include Bodhidharma's version of the precepts when you study them. Meditation where there is "emptiness" is what the world looks like without karma, AND "self". Watch and drop any clinging and aversion to your path, your practice, success or failure, or attainment. _/\_

Two versions of this: I quote the first a lot as an illustration of the power of just dropping the recursive mind and realizing that IT is actually the source of "problems". This, that we are presently peering at, is just reality. There is no problem with it.

Absolutely! In Buddhism, we are attempting to see through the delusion of the existence of a "self". When we don't identify with anger and it simply passes through us it creates no karma. When you grasp it, or try to push it away, it becomes part of your story, which is what karma IS. The arising emotion is liberated - free to be what it actually IS - a fleeting flash in consciousness. This is the difference between "practice" and "actualization". We need more actualizing!

Emotions are like any other phenomena in the sensory universe - they appear and disappear. They are impermanent. From a Buddhist perspective, we want to learn to allow all phenomena to arise in consciousness and pass from it without attachment or aversion to it. The way to train in this is meditation initially. It is fine and quite normal to have emotions arise, but when we cling to them, or make a story about ourselves from them they cause suffering and struggle.

Religions in general are most often created by mystics. A mystic has a first hand experience of the "deeper reality". They are compelled to share that experience, and people around them begin to write it down, sharing it as a story. Unfortunately mystical experience is nearly impossible to impart in language, and the new story of the experience and realizations is slightly corrupted in the retelling. People mistakenly believe that by emulating the story of the mystic, sometimes painstakingly imitating every detail, they themselves will become "enlightened" about the nature of reality. Organizations form (monastics), and rules are formulated by the (mostly) unenlightened followers - the mystical understanding is further and further diluted by those that think that the story of the experiential events are an instruction manual without understanding that: True, transformational mystical insight is NOT precipitated by practices of any kind. All of the overhead of interpretation and retelling of the mystics story should be minimized in my opinion. The emphasis should ALWAYS be on personal experience and transformation. Does the practitioner find that the practices are transformative in a way that can be qualified experientially? THAT is what matters. This is just MY opinion.

What would be "adharmic" if the fabric of reality is entirely Brahman?

Gods, ghosts, demons, mind-reading, generating sparks, visions, etc. etc. are all RELATIVE events, happening in the Relative world. There is nothing wrong with them, any more than there is something wrong with death, or a flower opening its petals. Events like this are doubtless fascinating, but they AREN'T liberation, and don't lead to liberation. The deeper point of Buddhism or traditional Daoism is to achieve insight and alignment. Insight is an Absolute realization about the the nature of reality. With insight comes a whole new understanding of these wonders that is much deeper and more whole. For more on the Relative and Absolute: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine Non-grasping to such phenomena actual makes them more likely to happen.

@doc benway Thank you. - There is great wisdom in the good doctor's last post, despite its seeming simplicity. These are some of the deepest practices you could find anywhere, shared cleanly and openly. It is a joy to read teaching like this. _/\_

I’m confused - shall I continue derailing?

Feel free to re-orient. _/\_

Nothing hidden or special. It's everywhere! https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Rigpa

First, it is worth saying that nirodha samapatti is not necessary for complete understanding. It IS a piece of territory that we all naturally traverse, and might notice IF we have some knowledge about what it is. The most outlandish BELIEVABLE stories I have heard about nirodha samapatti recently are probably Delson Armstrong's. Sitting for weeks outside while your beard grows undiscovered by search parties? Seems far fetched, but I reserve judgement. Personally I couldn't be gone and out of contact for 2 hours without my wife freaking out. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I AM saying that it isn't important in any way whatsoever. It is not a sign of any deeper understanding about the nature of reality. What isn't clear to me is why this chap didn't take this opportunity to lay out the very real implications of permanently shifting perspective. The truth is: If someone turned a camera on ME, I'd be taking that opportunity to say the most outlandish material I could muster in an attempt to wake up every suffering being that would ever encounter it. A point that needs repeating that I might not have made as clear as I could in my previous post is that the "supernatural" trappings and experiences on the path are just noise. They happen... they are interesting, but they don't indicate anything but that you are definitely ON the path. I could tell (and have told) stories about siddhis too, but they are just distractions from the real goal of any of these practices - non-dual realization. From the perspective from THAT realization, seeing angels and demons, or talking with trees and seeing auras, etc. are not supercharged moments of REAL meaning and implications, they are just experiences like any other experience. They are part of the show, but not the core material in any way. _/\_

I expect that is true, but I have already completed all of my teacher training. Now there is only Rigpa doing the training. _/\_

Finished this a few minutes ago, out of curiosity. He describes what probably (in Buddhist terms) describes a couple of "Arising and Passing Away" moments (though with some questionable time travel stories), that do not represent real insight and then speaking about his last episode he says he realized: This isn't wrong, but is a fairly tepid and indistinct description considering the effort he put into the other experiences, but let's allow for translation and cultural differences. In his favor, he DOES seem relaxed, gently good-humored, and KIND, one of the most major characteristics of those who have lived in the world with insight for a long time. What is actually important, that almost any "awakened being" would know to point to is: --How awake are you RIGHT NOW?-- Can you see or hear "emptiness" in this moment.. even if you have to turn your attention to it? What does that mean to you? Can you see that "self" is a delusion, even if you occasionally lose sight of this for a few minutes? How about the constructs of time and space? This insight is not an experience, it is a permanent shift in perception. It would have been nice to hear him share with the world the nature of his moment-to-moment life.

Welcome to the board, BSD. Hope you can find the support and information you seek!

I saw some long load times last night, but things seem OK this AM so far.

In this case, the discussion of Indra's Net as a metaphor comes from a Buddhist sutra: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra's_net#In_the_Buddhāvataṃsaka_Sūtra Seems like you have had quite a dramatic journey in your last 131 posts.

Beautiful. In Zen such experiences are called "makyo". Having crazy experiences is part of the path, and a fascinating one. Having them means that you have begun, and are moving forward toward understanding, but not much else generally. I would call most of these sorts of events "experiences". Experiences, like all other relative phenomena are impermanent. How do you know what is important or not? Ask yourself, has it created a shift toward something permanent? Is it something I can see is true in this moment, and in ALL moments? Real insight permanently and dramatically alters your understanding and world view. THESE sorts of experiences are the ones to ask about.

Ultimately, Prajna is holding NO view. The teachings are not the realization, and keeping traditions pure is nice idea from a cultural perspective, but means nothing from enlightened perspective. A good teacher will do whatever it takes to wake you up, whether it means quoting Rumi, Nisagadatta Maharaj, or Ren and Stimpy.

The Middle Way is not the way of the renunciate. We are not giving away all of our belongings or wealth, we are renouncing clinging and aversion to wealth and belongings. We won't solve suffering by giving people our wealth, or food, or it would already have happened. The source of all suffering is a lack of Prajna (Wisdom) which is insight into "emptiness". Our instruction as bodhisattvas is to be WITH suffering where it happens. Be kind. Be present with those that are suffering, when you encounter them. Be generous when the opportunity presents itself, but not at the expense of your personal security. Taking care of your finances, as long as it is not at the expense of others is fine. Where "self" has dropped away bodhisattvas will find that what they need is taken care of. They are free to be of benefit when and where they encounter suffering. -

The best way to clarify this is probably to say that it is anger arising from "SELF" view that no longer arises. Most people are not going to get this distinction. Following on from my point above, if the Buddha does act out of anger, that anger is really frustration that he couldn't help others with their self-imposed suffering. Most people are not going to get this distinction either. I only use the Pali Canon for examples because it was mentioned early and there is a popular current belief that somehow the Pali Canon teachings are somehow more pure than other Buddhism - a view I do not hold. There are many teachings in the Mahayana and Vajrayana from the enlightened perspective that must come from OTHER, albeit enlightened, teachers. There are enlightened teachers almost everywhere, even today, so no issue for me there. Agreed... it is just one lens amongst many, but an effective one. Enlightenment is, however, not truly definable be any set of definitions, but can only be triangulated by them.

Most of us walking the world identify our "self" as a narrow selection of all of the the perceptions and phenomena in the world. So, this itching sensation is on my "foot", when I look in the world, what I see is from MY perspective, but it can be seen, even logically, that these are arbitrary. When you drive the car, is the CAR also "I"? What about when you are in dreamless sleep... when does the sense of "I" go? When one "awakens" they realize that they have been living in a created story about the nature of the reality they live in. For the most part this doesn't change the behavior of our experience of the world, just how it is understood. If someone says, "Hi John" you smile and greet them. If someone asks which kind of ice cream you prefer, you respond. The difference is that you now realize that it isn't the imagined separate entity that responds, it is EVERYTHING... or, to look at it another way no-thing. The cause of your response is the entire perceivable fabric of reality. For it to be anything truly separate from that would be impossible. To insist that people shift into addressing you in some arcane way is disingenuous and lacks compassion. Some do it, but eventually grow out of it.

The Guru Viking podcasts are often very good. A surprising portion of the guests are awakened, or even at the point of having completely dropped "self", but not ALL of them. Why renounce the claim of being an arhat? Claiming the title implies a belief in being a separate, but special enlightened "being". In reality there ARE no beings to enlighten. Dogen points to this in his piece "Actualizing the Fundamental Point": The Buddha also got angry, got sick and died. He was a man like all other men, but one that realized that there WERE no men, just an enlightened, perpetual buddha-field. With this knowledge he still lived in the world like anyone else. I've never met anyone that would meet some of the criteria that might define a "Buddha" or Arhat from some of the tripitaka, but HAVE met beings, monastics, lay-people and non-Buddhists, that are and embody great realization, and no longer identify as "self" - this is "enlightenment with residue", which is what all enlightened "beings" that are still here in the world are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhat#In_Theravāda_Buddhism In my opinion, the salient characteristic of an arhat is having completely dropped the "self". This means that they no longer identify as one, NOT that their behavior is entirely perfected. There are countless arhats and "Buddhas" all over world, quietly just "being". They sometimes get angry, get sick and die, but with the realization that what they are isn't the "self" or world but the awareness that witnesses it. The primary way to tell the most realized is by how KIND they are. Consistently grumpy, impatient, argumentative teachers have work to do. One of the most helpful documents at my disposal as I dropped the last of the fetters was a something Daniel posted and shared, a fantastic lean, modern, phenomenological description of experience with no-self. When I first read it some time after awakening there was much of it that I didn't get, or that wasn't clear to me, but as dualities continued to drop away I would re-read it the points and they would clarify. I think becoming the enlightened "self", then realizing the error is simply a natural progression and realization on the path. Even after enlightenment and "arhatship"", the path, and the continued dissolving of dualities, never ends.

Welcome to the board, Krenx!