goldisheavy

Calling the primordial mind "non-conceptual" is deviant. That's one place where Dzogchen falls off the cliff often. But lucky for them they often correct themselves by saying that "non-conceptual" is not really correct and that you shouldn't attach yourself to such a conception. I mean, it's obvious to any fool that distinction between concepts and non-conceptual is just another concept in the first place. Primordial mind is beyond characteristics and it shines with the light of any characteristic whatsoever. For example, consider the day-to-day "ordinary" mind. Such mind is the fastest, most dynamic part of experience. But it's also the slowest and most stable. Do you see it? Do you see what is faster than atoms and slower than the movement of mountains in the mind?

Depending on what you believe yourself to be, that can be very true. Most people think they are the particulars of forms. They believe certain specifics make them who they are. A perception of those specifics can vanish in many ways. But is this annihilation? I don't think so. New specifics soon make an entry into the field of awareness. Nothing lasts. The experience of the unspecified is as temporal as the experience of specifics. I think seeking annihilation is more true of Sufis than Buddhists though. Buddhists are a little more subtle in defining Nirvana than just "annihilation" or "annihilation in God" or anything like that. In fact, if you hang in the Buddhists circles, you'll hear "middle way between the extremes of nihilism and eternalism". Nirvana is not defined in exactly the same way as fanaa. The real purpose of renunciation-flavor teachings is not annihilation. It's to uproot the dominance of the specifics on the mind, so that you can see the big picture and see beyond what is obviously apparent.

I agree completely. I think Santi is a good person. That's why my point was purposefully pedantic at the beginning. I wasn't saying that Santi was useless. I wasn't saying Santi was an unfair businessman or that he cheated his customers. I've been on Tao Bums for a little while and based on my attendance here I don't think Vajra really participated all that much. Nor do I think he shared anything all that profound. I would characterize his participation as nice, friendly and supportive of the general atmosphere. However, I don't see it as saintly and nor do I see it as an unmitigated outpouring of bliss or anything like that! So when someone was praising Vajra like he was God's gift to men, when that's not what I saw, I took exception to that. It's not a big deal in my opinion. Shortly thereafter I realized that what must have happened to get such public outburst of admiration must have been private interactions between Vajra and the guy that was adoring Vajra. So I made a note to that effect -- saying that it's best to render thanks in private for what was done in private. Again, not a big deal. But for some reason Vajra really didn't like that. So he exploded all over this forum with his wild outbursts. But, let's get some perspective again. Let's step back. I still think Vajra is a good guy <tm>, and I think he's fair and I do think he cares about what he does. I think he's insecure and I also think he has some serious obscurations that he could work on right now, had he more humility. A real Guru should be able to take an initiation from the dumbest person, while teaching others as a Guru. There is a story about that. One time Patrul Rinpoche met a student whom he initiated into Dzogchen. The student didn't recognize Patrul, because Patrul looked like an ordinary vagabond. So they got to talking and Patrul asked if this guy (his student) knew anything of Dzogchen. The guy said "Yes, would you like me to instruct you?" And Patrul said, "Yes, sure." So this guy initiated Patrul Rinpoche into his own teaching. That's what lila is all about. There are no limits. But it takes big big heart to realize that. My best friend has a saying. It goes like this, "Everything in the world is shit. Except for piss that is!"

There is a high security door that I have to pass often. It has a card access. It's always locked and it won't open without the card swipe. According to appearances and according to everything I know and even according to all my previous evidence, it seems the only way to open the door is to swipe the card. I say, "What if I assume it's open?" So, from then on, before I swiped my card, I would simply try to open the door on the assumption it's open. I had no reason to assume that at all. There was nothing in my experience or understanding that suggested it might be fruitful to try to open the door without a key card. But I kept attempting to open it. And LO, what did I find out? It turns out the door does open sometimes, just like that, without any key card swipe! I love to pull on closed doors. They look closed, but many doors open. For a while I was surprised by how many closed and locked doors opened just by pulling them.

Listen, we don't have time for this. I give you all my secrets right now: at the root of your being, you are omniscient. You have the inner wisdom, intuition, patience, sensitivity and all the qualities necessary to manifest anything you want. Just pay attention. And if something seems to be stuck or wrong, contemplate it. The secret is to stop externalizing authority and authenticity. Your experience is authentic. Your knowledge is authoritative. You can internalize this without harm. In the beginning you might think it makes you better than everything else. That's OK. You will grow beyond that stage if you continue your contemplation. Be mindful of the opinions of others, and do consider them -- but don't allow any opinion to topple who you are deep within. You are LORD. No matter what kind of tsunami your experience seems to resemble, even if the moon is burning and the Sun has gone dark, and if the Earth has split in half, and your body is turning inside out -- you are beyond all such appearances, and they only have power over you if you yourself empower them. It is you who gives power and meaning to appearances. And it is you who takes it away, O LORD. I bow one thousand times before your lotus feet. You too won't be wrong if you bow before yourself. Even as you may feel vulnerable. Even though you may see yourself lacking. You've always been beautiful and you have never lacked even one thing. All secrets are born and die in your heart and nowhere else.

The answer is simple. He wants my love. It's not good enough that some tao bums love him. He wants my love too.

Vajra, Enjoying yourself, eh, golden-palmed Guru Santi? Look -- I have tried to empower you numerous times, but each time you respond by trying to disempowering me. Do you understand why you cannot accept empowerment? It's cause your heart is the size of a baby pea. So I will tell you one more story, arrogant though you are. Suppose you have an acorn. And suppose you can't be sure it's acorn, but you've wished for all your life to grow a mighty big oak, and you want nothing in your life more than to see a mighty oak grow. And you have this unknown seed. Should you assume it's an acorn or should you assume it's just some algae gamete? If you assume it's algae gamete, you'll either abandon the acorn or at best throw it in water, which would be proper for an algae gamete. The only thing that makes sense to do, if growing an oak is the only wish you have, is to assume what you have there is an acorn. So right from the beginning you have to treat it as an oak. Plant it in soil, like you would an oak seed. Water it like you would an oak. Treat it in every way as an oak, and if you are right, it will grow up as an oak. If you are wrong, nothing will happen, but it's no loss if seeing an oak is all you ever wanted in life. When the oak is young, it's just a sapling. Protect its identity as an oak. When it grows up, it will protect you in turn. If you try to test the sapling the same way you would a might oak, you will break it and kill it. It won't grow up and it won't have a chance to protect you later on. So even before the oak is mighty, protect it and know it as mighty, even as it is vulnerable. Later it will protect you. Just so, if seeing God's face is all you want in life, you must assume you are God. Even a seed of God is God.

I am intellectual masturbator in the same sense that you're a scum sucking bottom feeder.

Vajra, There is a beautiful story I read somewhere. It's too bad I can't find the original anymore. So I'll retell it to you from memory. Once upon the time a Guru was sitting surrounded by his students. A new person walks in and says, "Dear Guru, I'd like to play a flute for you!" The Guru replies, "Please do!" So the new person plays the flute, and it sounds awful. The students all cringed as their ears were insulted by cacophony. At the end of performance, the Guru smiled and said, "Very good! This is truly excellent! I award you the title of MASTER FLUTIST!" All the students immediately became agitated and angry. They said, "What is the meaning of this? This was horrible! Guru, if you keep handing out titles like this, very soon they will become meaningless... That's crap. That's terrible... Arrrrgggg!!!" And there was much gnashing of teeth. The person who played the flute was exuberant though! He was ecstatic! He bowed and said, "Thank you!", and left. Then he returned one year later, and asked to play the flute again. The Guru agreed again. This time everyone could hear the indisputable mastery of this same person. That's a story for Vajra who is struggling to become a master flutist in his own right. Vajra, you are a master flutist! Enjoy.

That's wrong buddy. Let me clue you in how this works. Suppose you want to become strong one day, but right now you can only lift a 20lbs dumbbell, just barely. Should you consider yourself a weakling? You can. Many people do. It's what we are told to think. However, you'll be much more successful if right from the get-go you innerly assume an identity of a strong man. You'll have a lot more patience, confidence, poise, grace and natural wisdom spontaneously manifest right as you smoothly and gracefully progress along the curve of your strength development. It is even more so with God than with any other identity, because certain intents are only possible from the point of view of God in the first place. So for example, if you assume you are not God, then right away your ability to stop your own heart has been curtailed by that very assumption. On the other hand, if you assume you are God, that's one less blocker right there. Even if you assume God's identity, you can still be prevented from stopping your own heart, but you won't be prevented by anything external! You may be still prevented by your own commitment. If you see an oak sapling, it is correct to call it an oak, even if it doesn't give off a mighty shade. If you see a lion cub, it is correct to call it a lion, even if it still hasn't weaned itself off its mother's tit. Second, you commit a grave error. You imbue God with a false kind of invincibility and a false kind of perfection. You assume a God either could not or would not manifest as an ailing person or as a person of limited abilities and intelligence. That kind of error will indeed prevent you from seeing God's face. God is truly limitless and is not obliged to manifest omnipotence as your own preconceived understanding of invulnerability. Vulnerability is part of omnipotence. Fallibility is part of omniscience. Alas, if I do that, you won't be there to witness it. Only I can see the result of this kind of action. But don't be too quick to say I cannot do it. Just shut your mouth if you don't know. Enjoy.

Heck, why even say "a bit". It is cliche. It's what came out when I was thinking about it. Cliches are part of my thinking patterns. I hope you don't mind if I remember this example for future use.

Mak Tin Si, do you mean "footer" by any chance? Or do you mean "footage" as a movie recording of something?

That's correct! Of course it is. However I think it's a good one. What do you think? If you find some flaw in it, please let me know so I can make it better. This seems to imply that matter evolved consciousness. I can't agree with that at all. The reason I cannot agree with this, is that it's not logical. I recognize many competing ideologies but only if they are logical, congruent, cogent. I don't recognize illogical ideologies, because if I do, then you must recognize that my chair is controlling your brain. (Yea, I know it makes no sense, that's the point.) Emptiness itself is universal, however the particulars of form are not universal. So you are correct. Emptiness is not nothing, so there is "something" universal about form. Form is a partial reflection of universal wisdom. Doh! Relativity is all about playful variations. I don't see any contradiction there. I don't know what you mean by "clarity". Awareness is ever-clear, and cannot be more clear. The same with attention too. For example, if you believe you have muddy awareness, that's pretty clear? The cognizance of muddiness is not obscured by anything. You don't think "maybe I am muddy or maybe I am not" do you? And even if you thought "maybe I am muddy and maybe I am not" you'd not confuse that with "I am definitely muddy", so there is still ever present clarity in your mind. Clarity is not an attainment, it is a realization. There is a difference. EDIT: These questions should go into a separate thread. How about we let this thread die?

Vajra, you are making me break my inner promise to abandon this thread with this interesting post of yours. I must kindly take issue with some statements you make. When you say "I am", what is moving your lips? Are you moving your lips or is God moving them? If it's you, then you have a will and intent separate from God's. If so, please explain how is this kind of separateness accomplished. If not, then it's God saying those things. Then it's not wrong for God to call himself "God", albeit unconventional. It's also not wrong for God to call himself Santiago, because you can't tell God what to say. You are contradicting yourself. If God is all that exists, then who is this "you" that doesn't own powers? Who is the object of giving? Who does God give grace and blessings to, if God is all that exists? Can you add 1 + 1? EDIT: If you want to discuss God's nature, please make another thread, and let's allow this thread to go down into the halls of history.

I agree with you. Although I would say that "focus" often connotes mental effort, but attention is focused effortlessly, and effort can appear as an object of attention. It's interesting, because I can't answer this right away. You made me reflect. I am still not sure, but it seems right for now. If you have any other ideas about attention, please post. EDIT: I am not sure where the divisions fit in. So far I tend to think the mind is naturally divided all over the place, even with regard to that which is outside attention. The reason I think that, is when I had a mystical experience of undivided whole, how did I know it was "whole"? I knew it because I also knew what "not whole" was like, and this wasn't it. So that means my mind was dividing whole from not whole. In other words, I don't think it's possible to eliminate division altogether. Supposing you could achieve such elimination of division, if it can be said to be different from a divided mind, it's still just a state of mind that's recognized through division. So, both experientially and logically I arrive at the same thing with regard to division.

I think that's a good warning. However, the trouble is that it's very, very hard to establish what is "too much" and what is "too little". Further, some horses are crazy, and might kill you even if you did nothing wrong. Other horses might be numb or just stubborn and may not touch you even if you whack them half to death. This makes it very hard to get your bearings. It would be easy if we lived in an objective and easily measurable world. Then we'd know where the extremes were, and stick to the middle. At least I think so. But in reality it's all touch and go, trial and error, play by ear type of stuff. Mistakes should not be prevented too much. If you are too extreme in being careful so that you don't commit a mistake, you might forget to breathe and live too. Some amount of mistakes are natural, in my opinion. We're all going to die some day. The important question is -- have we lived?

I agree. So did you read the article I linked? It shows a continuum of opinion on the issue of apostasy. I think it's a reasonable article.

Everything??? I don't think so. Have you even looked at the article? It's not one-sided or anything.

So do I. Here's how the Islamic world views this: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...ticle743382.ece

There is no "please" about it. The only way you can understand intention is by yourself. I never say anything to the contrary. Nobody needs me to understand intention. I like to talk about it because I think I understand intention very deeply and profoundly. If it helps anyone, that's good. But whether what I say helps or not, whoever discovers the truth of intention does so by themselves.

First, I suggest to discontinue immediately for the time being. If you ignore this, it can develop into something worse. That's just a temporary safety precaution. Later you can resume punching when you learn how to punch better. Second, punch at 10% power and slower. Is it OK? If not, punch at 1% power. Find a point where punching feels OK or good. Then gently and gradually increase power and find where it just begins to feel not-OK. Observe yourself very very carefully, in a relaxed manner. Observant calm. Allow yourself to see and feel. What is happening? Why is it beginning to be not-OK now? You will see why. Doing this you will kill two birds with one stone. Not only will you know how to fix your punch, but you'll also know how to fix all your other problems later on. Most important is to never keep repeating something that goes wrong, because then you develop a wrong habit. If something feels wrong, it's best to discontinue it and to find the right way to do it, and then train that. You never want to train a bad pattern into memory -- be this pattern physical or psychological.

There are many techniques, but techniques are short-term, emergency band-aids. For example, you can focus on breathing out. Or you can sigh. You can let your arms flop around under their own weight and drop your shoulders, then shake your body a little. You can imagine a pleasant summer beach, ocean waves, forest sounds, or your favorite peaceful moment. All of these techniques work -- short term. They work because they allow you to take your mind off your problem. So for example, there is a hungry lion about to eat you, and you look at the blue sky and count your breaths. You get very calm, but then as soon as you return your gaze back to the lion, you are scared again, just like before, just for the same reasons as before. Long term solution to this is contemplation. You have to contemplate the causes of nervousness (or whatever your favorite word is for "lack of calm"). The best way to do so, in my experience, is to deliberately enter into a mildly (key word "mildly") nervous situation, and then contemplate your state of being as the situation unfolds. Why are you nervous? Examine it. Remember the situation too. Then when you have a few such situations clearly committed to memory, you can also contemplate them later in the comfort of your own home, as they say. Maybe you already have some clear memories of what makes you nervous -- so much the better if that's the case. When you contemplate your situation, don't dwell at the level of details. Instead try to rise higher and higher toward the ultimate basis, or the ultimate reason of your fear. Try to see it from multiple angles, but as you look at it from each angle, rise to the root concern. Don't stay at the superficial level and don't worry about solutions either. The goal should be wisdom and not some practical solution. The reason for this is that often when people seek solution, they want something that works at the level of concrete details while failing to see a deeper pattern or the root cause. So you end up having to constantly re-solve the same problem over and over as you solve your symptoms and not the root cause. So, when there is an emergency, use a quick technique to maintain calm. But if you want long term change in the flavor of your life, contemplate.

Try this. I can't guarantee it to work, but it worked on my warts when I was a kid. Tear or bite off the wart. Then pee on it. That's it. It shouldn't come back after that. What's left should shrivel up and fall off. I've also seen warts successfully "frozen off" my friends by cosmetics salons. I think they use liquid nitrogen to freeze them. The wart then shrivels up and falls off. It might change color before falling off.

That's right. So you do feel it. Most likely problem is you don't understand how to "control" it. Don't attempt to suppress it. Instead, starve the asthma of your love. Put yourself in this frame of mind, "Dear ashtma, I have nothing against you and if you want to manifest, do so, but you are on your own. I will not help to manifest you and I will not give you my love." Starve it of your love but don't hate it. Let your asthma be. Just don't feed it with your heart. Then. Imagine the greatest kindness you can. Dwell on the feeling of kindness and softness. Then allow this feeling to suffuse your entire being and your lungs in particular. Do this once a day or whenever you feel like doing it. Be kind to yourself and merciful, but also don't be hoo haa over your condition either. Don't fret. So on one hand, avoid pissing in your pants. If asthma wants to kill you -- let it. Do not fear. But on the other hand, be kind, be very kind to yourself. Combine fearlessness with kindness. Be simple. Be soft. Breathe easy. Try this. Don't just say it doesn't work without even trying. What I describe can be performed easily, comfortable, right where you are, and it is pleasant too. So it's not a big burden to try it. It's not a scapegoat. What I say is true. You just have no idea how deep the mind goes and what it all affects. What you are saying is true for you at this time. Yet I invite you to consider that you may have more possibilities and more untapped potential than you realize. This is a view of inner empowerment. I invite you to accept this view at least temporarily to see what implications it has for you. I am pretty sure that asthma is amenable to hypnotherapy. If you want to be lazy and if you don't want to use your own mind on your own, try visiting a good reputable hypnotherapist and let him/her do all the heavy lifting for you. ----- Let me ask you this. Close your eyes and envision yourself, with all your senses and with your entire being, envision yourself breathing as you would like to breathe. You are healthy. When you do this, DO ANY FEELINGS COME UP? Do you feel, "this feels wrong!" Or "this cannot be me"? Or "this is almost right but something is off...."? In other words, do you sense an inner rejection of the vision of the perfectly healthy you? Be honest to yourself. You don't even need to tell me what you find. You can keep it to yourself if you want. What happens sometimes is that if you envision your ideal self, you'll instantly get a reaction from your mind. Your mind may want kick the image out, it may say something like "I don't deserve this", or "this is not me", or "it's possible, but not for me" or "this feels odd", etc... It's showing you a rejection if you get feelings like that. If this happens to you, you need to contemplate and understand this rejection. You will need to convince your subconscious mind that it really shouldn't reject your ideal vision of yourself. Most of the time this is possible. But sometimes your mind is dead set on letting you suffer. Maybe your mind is deeply convinced you need to suffer for some reason. It's not necessarily a punishment. For example, if you are compassionate, you can have diseases just by having diseased people near you. Why? That's because your mind can refuse to feel good when others don't feel good. There are different ways to deal with this. But one possibility also is to accept this kind of sickness as something sacred. There is an option of not even trying to heal the sickness and to just enjoy it and accept it with grace. All options are open. Only your inner wisdom knows what is the best way for you.

I don't find a problem with money and business. It's strange that I constantly have to remind everyone about me not finding problems with money and business. What I have a problem with is mischaracterization. It's wrong to say that a business deal is unconditional or free giving. When you buy something in the store, you cannot say that what you have bought was freely given. It wasn't freely given. And it's OK that it was given conditionally. Just call it what it is. There are people in the world who do give of themselves freely. It's not business at all. They put no conditions on knowledge and wisdom at all. Whatever you learn is fully yours 100%, unconditionally. These people should not be confused with tradesmen. Exactly. There is a good reason why in many traditions you don't play with energy as a means for enlightenment. According to tradition Buddha Gotama was completely enlightened and could perform miracles such as emitting water and fire from his chest, and yet he said not a single word about kundalini in any of the Suttas. There is not a single word about kundalini in any of the works on nagualism. There is assemblage point, which Hindus don't even know about. There are energy compartments. But it's not kundalini -- not even close. Kabbalah energy configurations are also different. Truth is, there are many simultaneous, different, competing ideas about subtle energies. What does this mean? It means these visions are cultural, relative, empty (in the Buddhist sense), unique. They are not "HOW IT IS". They are how it is for some people in some belief systems. There is nothing universal about them if you look at them honestly. Even physical human anatomy is not universal. Some people have few more muscles than others, etc. People just don't pay attention to this. We all want to think that everything we know and see is objective and universally applicable. The only universal "thing" is the highest wisdom, which is very abstract and has no particular concrete representation at all.