ralis
-
Content count
13,827 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Everything posted by ralis
-
Perhaps Dzogchen is just another game in our known universe, which is one realm among many, in which there are an unlimited number of games to play.
-
So, rigpa is not experiential in anyway shape or form according to your supposition?
-
However, that only becomes an issue if one believes that one has no inherent existence and therefor there is no one to experience. The Advaita teachings have confused that issue.
-
Instead of attacking everyone's posts here, why not write from your own experience? What is and what is not an experience? I bet you have no way to explain that one.
-
It is not a thing or object with a specific location. Any so called experience of rigpa is useless without realizing space which is not an object or location. The experience is non verbal. The natural relaxed state is one of relaxing into space. That is not to say that I am objectifying space. The Longde series as taught by Norbu makes this very clear. It is far too easy to make this an anthropocentric experience which is an error in judgement.
-
I was challenging 'already' to come forth with his own experience as opposed to pointing out how wrong he thinks Tibetan Ice is. Most treat rigpa as a thing with a specific location. The heart and central channel are merely gateways to the vast universal space. 'Space' being the operative word here.
-
Please explain why his experiences are not rigpa?
-
This is the quote that I was challenging. That is a very broad statement with no context whatsoever and is very misleading. As for your comments, such are irrelevant.
-
Am I supposed to divine his intention or hidden meanings? For all I know, he may believe in the 'flat earth' theory or human alien hybrids. Darwin was wrong? What are your sources? I would expect that from one who believes in 'intelligent design' and a 6000 year old universe, but from you?
-
Have you mastered your mind such that the above statement would be in agreement with your experience? Are you referring to Gurdjieff's ideology regarding sleep? Please show peer reviewed research to back up your claim and what aspects of Western science are disproved? State clear and precise examples. Aliens, conspiracy theories etc. will be rejected.
-
Attempting to silence the mind is contrary to neurophysiology. If your mind was in absolute silence I doubt you would be posting here.
-
How does one go beyond thought? Blank or silent mind? Not in the least bit.
-
Are you maintaining a state beyond thought? Since when is thought a negative in the grand scheme of things? Certainly it is not a problem in Dzogchen or any other teaching that claims a fundamental understanding of life.
-
I think your entire post is fabricated. I guess you fail to understand what an analogy is.
-
Perhaps I am not understanding your narrative, but Wells is making an analogy in the quote you referenced.
-
I am not convinced that one actually leaves one's body, but is a wider visionary experience.
-
The physicist in question belongs to the 'Natural Law' political party. He ran for president here years ago. He seems way too spaced out and passive.
-
I really like the uniforms. Must make it extra special to feel part of an elite group of flyers.
-
To continue in delusion costs a lot of money and the TM people always have their hands out to receive.
-
There were 8mm cameras then.
-
I can' remember specific names, but yogis who hang out in extensive samadhi need students to tend to their bodily needs for extended periods of time.
-
I know someone that has spent a fortune at Fairfield Iowa studying at the Maharishi Institute learning to fly and levitate. He is still grounded. That video must have been filmed there.
-
There are some very good points in that quote!
-
To clarify, point # 2 claims that the nature of mind is the basis of everything i.e, all phenomena. Therefor, the basis of all phenomena is the nature of mind. That does not imply in the least a blank mind or absolute mental silence. Moreover, you have defined the nature of mind as an "it" which is an objectification of the nature of mind.
-
The problem is one of semantics in the quote above. Look implies observation to put it simply. They? Third person pronoun which is formless? Makes no sense.
