dwai

Not really. Nirguna Brahman is the "I am", pure subject without predicate. It is not "God", because God is Saguna Brahman (with properties). Nirguna Brahman is without any properties, a void == Shunyata. What you have to understand is that there is a difference between Subject predicate and Pure subject.

Chitta is a part of the antahkarana complex...it is not Atman. It is phenomenal. It is not the same as objectless consciousness.

But Alaya Vijnana is not something that Buddha taught. It was created by his followers.

New Age and Vedas? And Infinite selves is not an extreme? Infinite....can you even fathom that? One could call it "Infinitism" Alaya Vijnana has been soundly refuted by Shankara and many after him.

just try going beyond the self. You cannot...no one can. Because if there is not "I am", there is nothing. Even when you are reasoning with yourself, or making statments like "there is no self", it is the self that is making the statement. Without consciousness nothing exists, because there is no "light to make objects visible". You formulate "No self" with the "self". So what is the underlying enabler of this kind of thinking? The Self!

Exactly my point. There is no "I am the I". Is simply is "I am". But there are layers of "this and that" (objects) that are superimposed on this "I". Think about it way, are you aware of yourself only in relation to objects and phenomena or are you aware of your SELF in spite of all externalities? The Self is eternal, self-aware and non-phenomenal. To give an analogy....Can light shine on itself? Think of Consciousness as Light. Just as light makes objects visible, similarly consciousness makes objects visible. But if there were no objects to illuminate, would the light cease to exist? Ditto with Consciousness. I do have a base in meditation and Tai Chi/Nei Gung. I also happen to believe that there is no "ONLY" answer or solution to spiritual quests...there are many paths based on the temperament of the seeker.

Actually no -- all that would do is show that there IS no Other in the absolute sense...it is only the Non-dual Self. It is akin to recognizing the fact that the "others" are also you. Like I have said before, there is no "attainment" because the self is not separate from me, or you or anyone else. It has to be realized. How? By stripping away all layers of phenomena and objects from consciousness. But we are limited adjuncts of the unlimited...so we must rely on syntax and percepts and concepts to communicate ideas. There are three levels of explaining Absolute Non-Duality. 1) Silence (Buddha's way was that...to not speak about it) 2) To use Negatives (Shunyata or Neti-Neti) -- Madhyamika, Advaita and Tantra do this 3) to use descriptives such as Tat Tvam Asi, Aham Brahmasmi and Sat-Chit-Ananda (also done by Advaita and Tantra). These are all different techniques used to express (or not) Absolute Non-Duality, directed towards different types of seekers. Buddhism does only categories 1 and 2. Vedanta and Tantra do all three...

What makes you aware of this? If sleep is enough, then good for you. That doesn't change the facts...

You say that because you don't understand what phenomenon is and you haven't known Turiya yet.

Actually Consciousness is not a phenomenon. It doesn't rise and fall...it simply IS. By this I am referring to the consciousness that is devoid of objects (thoughts, etc). It is pure knowing. It is not a phenomenon because it is self-illumined. Think about it this way -- The only thing that is certain is that You Are (I am). That awareness is not something that someone has to make you aware of. It simply is. It is does not begin and end...not even in deep sleep state. Infact, meditation's role is to take the seeker to the "Deep sleep-like" state (called Turiya in yogic parlance) while not asleep. Someone had asked me "are you aware of who you are in Deep sleep state"? My reply is what is there to be aware about awareness? That is a logical impossibility. Objectless Consciousness cannot be the object of itself, it is self-aware, self-illumined. Consciousness (Atman) cannot extinguish itself because it doesn't have a beginning or an end. The infinite eternal mind-stream(s) that Buddhists refer to as Alaya Vijnana is actually wrongly ascribed as being so. It is only one...and that is Atman/Brahman/Tao/Shunyata/Shiva (add on your favorite word here). Actually Hindus accept all sincere spiritual systems as valid. There are different means for people with different capabilities. Some can show unconditional and infinite love so Bhakti (or the path of devotion). Some can act impeccably (wu wei), so Karma. Yet others use the path of Ashtanga Yoga, so Raja and yet others use their intellect, so Jnana. These are all valid (and every system out there has to fall in one of these four categories). The debate was not beacause of exclusivistic claims on behalf of Hindu thought. The debate was because some bums here decided that Buddhism is the "Only valid way". BTW, spellings are easy...try firefox and spellchecker.

Nagarjuna's references might have been towards those darshanic systems that stopped at Saguna Brahman. The Anatta that Buddhism talks about is validated by Advaita and Tantra. All Anatta is saying is that Jiva is not Atman, Antahkarana is not Atman. Atman is beyond concepts and percepts...it simply is...when you peel away every object, phenomenon, the unfiltered, ever present awareness that exists...that is Atman. In fact Atman/Brahman/Tao/Shiva/Shunyata is totally free. Absolute freedom is freedom of knowledge (jnata) and freedom of action (karta). That's why there is no "Static" self. The Absolute Self is Dynamic.

That is a bunch of BS invented by Buddhists who didn't understand what Madhyamika is all about to "prove" that their flawed understanding is "superior". Try as you may, you cannot disprove the existence of the Self.

New Age and me? Is the Pot calling the Kettle black? The right view you and your buddies are touting unfortunately is a categorical framework that you simply think of as a framework dissolver. No Dependent Origination or Middle Path or anything will get you there. They are merely tools you use in the journey. To access Absolute reality, you have to simply drop all sensory cognition, intellectual categorization, all thoughts, all objects in your consciousness. Only then will you become it. Otherwise you will be stuck in the conundrum of making the ultimate truth claim that there is no ultimate truth. Even if you repeat the same crap a million times, it will not make it any more valid than it was the first time you made such a claim. Shunyata is self-aware and self-existent. You know why? Because nothing gives rise to it. It simply IS. Being void of all properties, qualities, there is no way to observe it, measure or describe it. Yet all Consciousness is encompassed in it. Because it IS consciousness itself. See Shankara's criticism of the Alaya Vigyana in an earlier post. It is self-aware and self-illumined because there is no other. Consciousness is self-aware...that's why you know that You Are, in other words, aware of yourself. It's only that you don't yet know that I am also you and you are also VH and VH is also Taomeow and so on. And that we are all one...since there is only One Absolute Consciousness.

You have had little to say about me personally because you first attacked and insulted my entire creed (if you haven't gone and deleted your pronouncements in those threads). None of the above disagree with me, except you and perhaps some equally misguided "experts" of neo-Buddhism. Advaita, Taoism, Tantra and Madhyamika Buddhism all lead to the same thing...something that is beyond categorical frameworks, something that cannot be fathomed using the mundane faculties of perception and cognition. They are all fingers that point to the same moon. Some choose to focus on the finger, others on the moon. That something is non-phenomenal, it is self-existent and self-aware/self-illuminated. It is also each and every one of us...sans our limiting adjunct. When we dissolve all objects from our consciousness and only it stands on it's own accord, that is Tao, Shunyata, Advaita, Brahman, Parama-Shiva.

Takes one to know one...

None of what I said was ad hominem. Anyone who has observed you since you started will come to the same conclusion as I did (well I'd perhaps exclude Mikaelz from that list). I really don't want to engage you and it's perhaps my ego that keeps drawing me back into these discussions, since I think you shouldn't be left to spread the garbage that you do, under the guise of pretentious proclamations of wisdom and personal experience. Your half baked understanding, coupled with your superficial eloquence (I must admit that you do manage to sound like you know somethings, till one scratches the surface) makes you a potentially dangerous influence on those who haven't yet ventured one or all of the subjects (Buddhism, Vedanta, Tantra). I understand that you have a pretty extensive library which is evident from your "throwing quotes" without using your intellect. That's what rote memorization of scriptures will get you, when the discriminating intelligence (viveka) is not used. If you haven't understood what I am trying to say, perhaps you aren't ready to understand Advaita and Tantra at all...stuck as you are in what you think is the Madhyamika path (but you are not...you are just one lost soul swimming in a fish bowl...)

Unfortunately, despite all your braggadocio, you come across as an empty shell without much experiential knowledge. And going by your posts, your knowledge of "my religion" is so shallow that it is not even worth responding to. Same goes for your "experiences". I know...a few members of my family happen to be the real deal, and a lineage that is only about 4000 years old. And I trust their testimony and my personal experiential knowledge far more than some wannabe internet zealot!

I think it is you who is obsessed with a mistaken understanding of Buddhism. By virtue of being an Advaitin Taoist Tantrika, I automatically discard the categorical framework, since I know it only leads to relative truths. You and Mikaelz need to spend some time contemplating your obsession with Buddhist exclusivism...then your categorical framework will become clear automatically. You are not worthy of teaching anyone anything at this point son...first spend some time learning (really learning)...and find a real teacher who will tell you that your fanaticism wrt Buddhism is antithetical to Buddha's middle-path. Then perhaps you will develop enough prajna to teach yourself. After that, you can venture to teach others...

Actually you are. You see, the Atman (True Self, which is also Brahman, Tao, Shunyata) when suffering from the limiting adjunct (physical body, brain, intellect, etc), uses categorical frameworks such as what you keep touting as the "Ultimate truth that is not Ultimate" to create it's reality -- which is vyavaharika or lower reality. It is subject to percepts, concepts, dependent on categorical frameworks...It is relatively true, but not absolute. The only absolute is Brahman, Tao, Shunyata.

For the n'th time...that is simply YOUR MISINTERPRETATION. There IS NO Merging...you already are Brahman.

Greetings... Someone very close to me has started off learning Dahn Yoga. They do something called Brain Vibration meditation... Is anyone familiar with this "Yoga" and has some opinions about (good or bad, what to watch out for, etc), please do share. Thanks, Dwai

holy s#!t! Dahn Mu Do is Jane Fonda doing high kicks!?!

Indeed the differences are not just in semantics, but in what the Buddhists want to interpret certain words as. They consider the "Self" to be the personal self, the egoic entity that is the mundane self. Advaita and Tantra consider this self to be impersonal and the only self. That is the difference. The only think unfortunately that is certain in this reality is the fact that "I am". The whole process of denying the "Self" falls apart because the exercise is irreconcilably coupled with the "I am". The Atman -- The Real Self, not the complex of antahkarana (or the five skandhas as per Buddhist tradition) is self-illuminated. It is Pure Knowing, self-aware. See, Advaita Vedanta or Tantra don't actually say "Merge" into Brahman (or Shiva). They say Become Brahman. To know Brahman is to become Brahman. How do you do it? Peel off the layers of ignorance that cover the true self (the Atman). Once only the Atman remains, the Brahman stands forth. Because Atman is Brahman. The problem is that Buddhists allude a personification of Nirguna Brahman (Void Brahman) when actually none is insinuated. That which is personified is Saguna Brahman and that is the God, Allah, your deity of choice. It is a construct of refined Egoic self, which is a result of it's background, categorical framework based on which it perceives and conceives reality. Okay...I bow out of this discussion now. Regards, Dwai