xabir2005

16th August entry on Scott Kiloby's facebook wall: http://www.facebook.com/#!/kiloby?ref=ts Scott Kiloby: If you see that awareness is none other than everything, and that none of those things are separate "things" at all, why even use the word awareness anymore? All you are left with is the world, your life, the diversity of experience itself. ... We talk about awareness only to see that what we take to be separate objects are really thoughts, emotions, sensations, etc appearing and disappearing within awareness. As that is seen through, we see that the word awareness is actually pointing to the world itself. But the separation is now sweetly missing.

How will what you realized thus far lead to the insight that The phenomenal world, without addition or subtraction, is Mahamudra/liberation?

Good! Reminds me of Reflection and Presence: The Dialectic of Awakening The many levels of reflection and post-reflection.

Yes. Essentials of Mahamudra is the commentary of Mahamudra: The Moonlight. You should get that book to complement Mahamudra: The Moonlight. Mahamudra: The Moonlight is another superb book by Dakpo Tashi Namgyal, sorry didn't mention it earlier.

Sorry, but I just feel a good translation of TTC will go a long way helping westerners understand TTC without relying on the Chinese version. And unfortunately, most are way off and confusing.

From The Four Yogas and the Five Paths, page 248 of 'Essentials of Mahamudra' by Khenchen Trangu Rinpoche (Thusness and I would recommend this book along with 'Clarifying the Natural State' - very good teachings and instructions, even for a non-Mahamudra practitioner): The four types of mahamudra can be correlated to the five paths of the sutra vehicle. The yoga of one-pointedness corresponds to the first two paths of accumulation and preparation. We do not have direct realization of emptiness on these paths; nevertheless insight has been generated to some extent within our continuum. The yoga of freedom from complexity corresponds to the third path of seeing. Emptiness is now realized directly, unmediated by conceptuality. The yoga of one taste corresponds to the fourth path of meditation, and the yoga of nonmeditation corresponds to the pith path of no more learning. The text and treatises speak extensively of extraordinary qualities - emanations, powers and clairvoyances, the thirty-two marks and the eighty signs of a buddha, and so forth - that we develop on the paths and that are complete on the final path. When we have progressed through the four yogas and arrived at the final yoga, we do not have the qualities of emanation and clairvoyance or the physical signs of the Shakyamuni Buddha. Why is that? There is really no difference in terms of the qualities of mind - in terms of what needs to be abandoned and what needs to be realized. Buddha Shakyamuni, however, spent incalculable lifetimes accumulating merit and wisdom, so that when he took birth in India, he took birth not through the force of ordinary karma but through the force of having accumulated vast collections of merit and wisdom. Milarepa, on the other hand, was born a very ordinary person. Through the ripening of actions and afflictions that were accumulated on the basis of confusion, he was extremely fortunate to be able to meet with a fully qualified guru and receive profound instructions from the guru. He was able too exert himself ferociously at this practice so that he achieved enlightenment in one lifetime. The mind of Milarepa was no different from the mind of Shakyamuni Buddha in what it abandoned and what it realized; however, not having progressed through the path in the same way by accumulating such vast merits, Milarepa did not have the qualities of body and speech that Buddha Shakyamuni had. ----------- Also, from 'Clarifying the Natural State' by Dakpo Tashi Namgyal, it states: Presently, since you simply sustain the way of the natural state and do not practice the path explained in the causal vehicles, the signs of that path will therefore not appear. However, it is held that all the manifest qualities will appear simultaneously and spontaneously once you have perfected the strength of greater Nonmeditation.

Here's something more acceptable. The DAO that can be expressed is not the eternal DAO. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. “Non-existence” I call the beginning of Heaven and Earth. “Existence” I call the mother of individual beings. Therefore does the direction towards non-existence lead to the sight of the miraculous essence, the direction towards existence to the sight of spatial limitations. Both are one in origin and different only in name. In its unity it is called the secret. The secret’s still deeper secret is the gateway through which all miracles emerge. Translated into German by Richard Wilhelm (1910), thence into English by H.G. Ostwald (1985) or The tau (reason) which can be tau-ed (reasoned) is not the Eternal Tau (Reason). The name which can be named is not the Eternal Name. Non-existence is named the Antecedent of heaven and earth; and Existence is named the Mother of all things. In eternal non-existence, therefore, man seeks to pierce the primordial mystery; and, in eternal existence, to behold the issues of the Universe. But these two are one and the same, and differ only in name. This sameness (or existence and non-existence) I call the abyss — the abyss of abysses — the gate of all mystery. Translated by John Chalmers (1868)

I think many translations of TTC are way out. I almost didn't recognise that it was the first chapter of TTC.

Loppon Namdrol (whose main practice is Dzogchen and as I recall was being asked by some lamas/rinpoches to teach dzogchen though he declined): No, but I have heard (from ChNN among others) that the disappearance of the body is not necessarily a sign of the body of light. Hindus also gain control over the four elements, also Arhats can gain control over the four elements. Gaining control over the four elements is mundane siddhi, it is not excellent siddhi, nor is it reserved for Vajrayana and Dzogchen people. However, if someone has not studied in detail, they might think that many mundane siddhis are profound. So yes, what I am telling you is that I do not consider the so called rainbow body to much more than a display of mundane siddhi to create faith. I am glad you have faith in the teachings, but as I said, I do not derive my faith in the teachings through illusions and phantasmagoria. N he also said: My faith in Buddhism is based on the Buddha's teaching of dependent origination, not reports about rainbow body, etc. he also said: There is no teaching in Buddhism higher than dependent origination. Whatever originates in dependence is empty. The view of Dzogchen, according to ChNN (Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche) in his rdzogs chen skor dri len is the same as Prasanga Madhyamaka, with one difference only - Madhyamaka view is a result of intellectual analysis, Dzogchen view is not. Philosophically, however, they are the same. The view of Madhyamaka does not go beyond the view of dependent origination, since the Madhyamaka view is dependent origination. He also cites Sakya Pandita "If there were something beyond freedom from extremes, that would be an extreme." Further, there is no rigpa to speak of that exists separate from the earth, water, fire, air, space and consciousness that make up the universe and sentient beings. Rigpa is merely a different way of talking about these six things. In their pure state (their actual state) we talk about the radiance of the five wisdoms of rig pa. In their impure state we talk about how the five elements arise from consciousness. One coin, two sides. And it is completely empty from beginning to end, and top to bottom, free from all extremes and not established in anyway. Dzogchen teachings also describe the process of how sentient being continue in an afflicted state (suffering), what is the cause of that afflicted state (suffering), that fact that afflicted state can cease (the cessation of suffering) and the correct path to end that suffering (the truth of the path). Dzogchen teachings describe the four noble truths in terms of dependent origination also. Ergo, Dzogchen also does not go beyond Buddha's teaching of dependent origination which Nagarjuna describes in the following fashion: I bow to him, the greatest of the teachers, the Sambuddha, by whom dependent origination -- not ceasing, not arising not annihilated, not permanent, not going, not coming, not diverse, not single, was taught as peace in order to pacify proliferation.

Zenmar's understanding of dharma is skewed to his own understanding, experience and realization, so he will not be able to present the whole picture and understanding of Buddhism. His teachings are more of Hinduism rather than Buddhism. As for his book recommendations: http://www.darkzen.com/bookstore/bookstore.html I think they are all good, except that I will take out '*The Authentic Dhammapada of the Buddha*' from the list because they have biased and inaccurate translations. Books I personally wouldn't consider: *The Authentic Dhammapada of the Buddha* - just check comments at amazon.com for more info, comments, and the low ratings. Also, 'Divine Revelation in Pali Buddhism' has some bad reviews on amazon. Incidentally, 'The Authorized Dark Zen Meditation Manual of Buddhism' also have some bad reviews and poor ratings on Amazon. My suggestion: go for those time tested techniques and teachings. Go for a true authentic Zen lineage and teacher if you are genuinely interested in Zen. Bodhidharma, Huang Po, Hui Hua, Lin Chi, Hui Neng (Sixth Zen Patriarch), all these ancient zen masters' works I have read and can recommend. Also not mentioned by him: Bankei, Chi Nul, also quite good. I also like Master Hsu Yun, a modern day Chinese Ch'an master, as his teachings are relevant to my practice of self-inquiry. Zen Master Dogen's stuff are very good and his insights are very deep and Thusness likes it a lot because it speaks very much of his own experience, though I haven't read much into it. Modern Zen Masters like Steve Hagen, Thich Nhat Hanh, Ven. Jinmyo Renge osho, also good sources of teachings with exceedingly deep insights. Toni Packer is also great (she was an ex successor of Phillip Kaplaeu Zen Roshi before she left the tradition to become a non-traditionalist 'teacher').

There are many living bodhisattvas today.

Arhant is not about immortality, but ending suffering, ignorance, and the cycle of birth and death. Arahant: In the early scriptures and in modern Theravada Buddhism, it means anyone who has reached the total Awakening and attained Nibbana, including the Buddha. An arahant is a person who has destroyed greed, hatred, and delusion - the unwholesome roots which underlie all fetters - who upon decease will not be reborn in any world, having wholly cut off all fetters that bind a person to the samsara. In the Pali Canon, the word is sometimes used as a synonym for tathagata.[1] Immortal: Xian (Chinese: 仙/仚/僊; pinyin: xiān; Wade-Giles: hsien) is a Chinese word for an enlightened person, translatable in English as: * "spiritually immortal; transcendent; super-human; celestial being" (in Daoist/Taoist philosophy and cosmology) * "physically immortal; immortal person; immortalist; saint" (in Daoist religion and pantheon) * "alchemist; one who seeks the elixir of life; one who practices longevity techniques" or by extension "(alchemical, dietary, qigong) methods for attaining immortality" (in Chinese alchemy) * "wizard; magician; shaman" (in Chinese mythology) * "genie; elf, fairy; nymph" (in popular Chinese literature, 仙境 xian jing is "fairyland", Faerie) * "sage living high in the mountains; mountain-man; hermit; recluse" (folk etymology for the character 仙) * "immortal (talent); accomplished person; celestial (beauty); marvelous; extraordinary" (metaphorical modifier)

All of lino's posts are equally odd

Yes.. It is an important insight, yet it is far from the whole story. If we look at Tozan's five ranks (zen map of the stages of enlightenment), it is only the first rank: Relative within the Absolute.

Yes. Dark Zen does not have Zen lineage so is generally not considered 'orthodox Buddhism'. Zenmar is coming from the I AM stage of enlightenment in Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment Funny thing: Dark Zen once invited Thusness to join (or teach, if I remember correctly?) Dark Zen, long ago, which he rejected.

Thanks for pointing out... Tao is Flowing... unique and fresh and luminous at every moment... as Heraclitus would say, "Upon those who step into the same rivers, different and again different waters flow." Thanks for joining us at TheTaoBums!

Remember I said one of the difference between a Buddha and an Arhant is that a Buddha is omniscient

I agree. See Ken Wilber Stops His Brain Waves

No not really. The universal characteristics of reality/each sensate experience: impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, non-self, are universal. Since these are universal, the realizations of everyone doing the same practice will definitely be universal.

Good quotes. Except he's not saying this to boast his ego... he is simply stating facts as they are. And facts are the only thing that is helpful. I'd rather hear facts rather than false humility. Here's another quote: [upaka said] ‘Friend, your faculties are clear, the color of your skin is pure and bright. Under whom have you gone forth, friend? Who is your teacher? Whose Dhamma do you profess?’ I [The Buddha] replied to the Ajivaka Upaka in the stanzas: ‘I am one who has transcended all, a knower of all, Unsullied among all things, renouncing all, By craving’s ceasing freed. Having known this all For myself, to whom should I point as teacher? I have no teacher, and one like me Exists nowhere in all the world With all its gods, because I have No person for my counterpart. I am the Accomplished One in the world I am the Teacher Supreme. I alone am a Fully Enlightened One Whose fires are quenched and extinguished. I go now to the city of Kasi To set in motion the Wheel of Dhamma. In a world that has become blind I go to beat the drum of the Deathless.’ [upaka replied] ‘By your claims friend, you ought to be the Universal Victor.’ ‘The victors are those like me Who have won to destruction of taints. I have vanquished all evil states, Therefore, Upaka, I am a victor.’

Your post is funny To abbot: "Give me the 84,000 teachings. NAO."

You are practicing to gain enlightenment, except that there is no 'you', only 'practicing'. There is walking, but no walker. There is thinking, no thinker. There is perception, no perceiver.

I must say that I have great respect for Kenneth and his works, and actually think that his three gears are very well categorized. For example, First gear is a separate practice on its own and does not lead to Second gear self-realization (I AM). Third gear can also be reached without going through first gear (think: Dzogchen, Zen, etc). Second and third gear are what Thusness and I calls "direct path". First gear, we call "gradual path". Kenneth calls "developmental path". The only part where we don't agree is Kenneth's claim that Arhats do not realize non-duality of subject and object (3rd gear). In our understanding, the path (gear) in which they undertake is different, yet at the end the realizations and results are the same. However, the Arhat following classic Vipassana path do not undergo 2nd gear/I AM phase - that belongs to Advaita or Zen practice. Personally, I focus a lot on the 2nd gear, more so than 1st gear. (more info on my e-book/journal on my self-realization and 2nd gear practice - http://www.box.net/shared/3verpiao63 ) You just have to choose a path, if Daniel's work resonates, then I suggest to focus on that, it will also eventually lead to insights of non-duality and anatta. As Thusness wrote before: “Hi Gary, It appears that there are two groups of practitioners in this forum, one adopting the gradual approach and the other, the direct path. I am quite new here so I may be wrong. My take is that you are adopting a gradual approach yet you are experiencing something very significant in the direct path, that is, the ‘Watcher’. As what Kenneth said, “You're onto something very big here, Gary. This practice will set you free.” But what Kenneth said would require you to be awaken to this ‘I’. It requires you to have the ‘eureka!’ sort of realization. Awaken to this ‘I’, the path of spirituality becomes clear; it is simply the unfolding of this ‘I’. On the other hand, what that is described by Yabaxoule is a gradual approach and therefore there is downplaying of the ‘I AM’. You have to gauge your own conditions, if you choose the direct path, you cannot downplay this ‘I’; contrary, you must fully and completely experience the whole of ‘YOU’ as ‘Existence’. Emptiness nature of our pristine nature will step in for the direct path practitioners when they come face to face to the ‘traceless’, ‘centerless’ and ‘effortless’ nature of non-dual awareness. Perhaps a little on where the two approaches meet will be of help to you. Awakening to the ‘Watcher’ will at the same time ‘open’ the ‘eye of immediacy’; that is, it is the capacity to immediately penetrate discursive thoughts and sense, feel, perceive without intermediary the perceived. It is a kind of direct knowing. You must be deeply aware of this “direct without intermediary” sort of perception -- too direct to have subject-object gap, too short to have time, too simple to have thoughts. It is the ‘eye’ that can see the whole of ‘sound’ by being ‘sound’. It is the same ‘eye’ that is required when doing vipassana, that is, being ‘bare’. Be it non-dual or vipassana, both require the opening of this 'eye of immediacy'” And “Hi Gozen, I fully agree with what you said. It is just a casual sharing with Gary as he seems to be experiencing some aspects of the direct path. To me both gradual and direct path will eventually lead us to the same destination. It is rather the degree of understanding we have on a particular teaching. If we practice wholeheartedly, whatever traditions will lead us to the same goal. Frankly without re-looking at the basic teachings of Buddhism about the dharma seals and dependent origination, I will be leaving traces in the Absolute. In vipassana, there is the ‘bare attention’ and there is the mindful reminding of impermanence, no self and suffering of the transience. It is a very balance and safe approach. Like in Zen tradition, different koans were meant for different purposes. The experience derived from the koan “before birth who are you?” is not the same as the Hakuin’s koan of “what is the sound of one hand clapping?” The five categories of koan in Zen ranges from hosshin that give practitioner the first glimpse of ultimate reality to five-ranks that aims to awaken practitioner the spontaneous unity of relative and absolute are meant to prevent leaving traces. (You should be more familiar than me ) My point is when we simply see the Absolute and neglect the relative, that ‘Absolute’ becomes dead and very quickly another ‘dead Absolute construct’ is being created. In whatever case, we can only have a sincere mind, practice diligently and let the mind figure the rest out. The mind does not know how to liberate itself. By going beyond its own limits it experiences unwinding. From deep confusion it drops knowing. From intense suffering comes releasing. From complete exhaustion comes resting. All these go in cycle perpetually repeating, Till one realizes everything is indeed already liberated, As spontaneous happening from before beginning.”

It's happening every moment, some subtle attraction, aversion, ignorance is always there. Even if you do not have very gross level desires at the moment. There are three kinds of cravings that all samsaric beings are chained by: craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming/existence, and craving for no-becoming/non-existence. So there is craving for pleasures, attachment to existence, and aversion. I am not aware that any one no longer craves for pleasures, is not attached to existence, and do not have aversion for unpleasant experiences. Unless such a being is an Arhant, already liberated. Unsatisfactoriness is inherent in all experience, because all experience is arising and subsiding in lightning speed every single moment. Yet we solidify these experiences into an object of grasping, and solidify a 'self' out of it which is the experiencer and owner of various objects. So by seeing inherently and dualizing the non-dual nature of reality, we no longer see things as it is and start grasping after illusory things. We think that satisfaction comes from 'the other side', the pleasurable objects, etc. We constantly try to bridge the unbridgeable gap between subject and object (e.g. 'me' craving over 'that thing'), not knowing that such division is non-existent, and that there isn't an inherent subject or inherent object of grasping. Such activities are suffering. But since things do not exist the way we think of them (as solid, inherent, permanent, graspable), we are bound to suffer because we are not living in reality. We think it's there for us to seek and grasp, but there isn't. Whatever we experience is constantly dissolving every single moment. What is there to grasp, what is there to 'satisfy', if it is constantly dissolving every single moment? Satisfaction cannot come from grasping onto what is ungraspable and transient. Satisfaction is simply the appeasement of dissatisfaction, which comes from relinquishing craving and clinging, and that is Nirvana. That comes from deep insight that sees through the solidity of experience and the subject-object duality, all of which causes grasping and seeking after our illusion of solid external objects. Even pleasant states of experiences, the most pleasurable samsaric existence - the jhanas, are characterized by impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and not-self/not-mine. Whatever experience is wonderful as it is as the expression of luminosity and emptiness, without subject-object duality, the nature of reality, it is only that we fail to realize it's true nature that we start grasping, dualizing, craving, and making suffering for ourselves. Here it is seen that everything is just an immediate non-dual expression of reality, there is only total authentication of immediate non-dual reality without grasping, craving, aversion involved.

Precisely. True liberation and wonder is found through the cessation of ignorance, clinging, suffering. This is called Nirvana. And this is through realizing the nature of reality which is beyond our delusion of inherently existing self and inherently existing world. At which point all our experience are realized to be luminous and empty. Seeking/craving for happiness through samsaric experiences arise due to delusion of the true nature of reality, and only causes endless sufferings. This is called Samsara. Nirvana can be experienced while we are alive. But it is not found through seeking and grasping. It is found through great wisdom and insight.