Apech

I think I get what you are saying.

Yes of course but then we have to talk about being beyond concept - which presents some difficulties.

The end goal is Buddhahood surely. Then there is the debate about whether this is something you develop or is it something inherently present which you reveal. In your previous post you quoted commentators talking about Buddha-nature - which in certain teachings (like Mahamudra) is the cause, path and goal - all at once. Buddha qualities like bodhicitta arise directly from it - they can't be expanded by us - or that is how I see it. We, for instance might try to be more compassionate in the normal sense but this is not the same as the Buddha's compassion.

I forgive.

Deliberate wooling of the message. (which bits were pompous?)

Bodhi-cheating The art work of early Buddhism shows what early Buddhism and the Buddha was like. He is not depicted but represented by a pair and sandals, or an empty cushion and so on. He is surrounded by dancing and singing, by nature spirits including voluptuous female nature spirits, and naga serpents. This is a shamanistic scene. Buddha was a shaman who imparted knowledge. A few centuries after his death the great king/emperor Ashoka appropriated Buddhism because it gave a chance of a way out of the otherwise inevitable consequences of the wide-scale slaughter he had perpetrated as part of his empire building. He felt sorry for this - sorry for himself in fact and wanted to save himself from the hell realms. The state subsidised Buddhism he introduced was, unlike the original Buddhism both scholastic and monastic. Early Buddhism had no written texts but under the new Buddhism the collections of texts became everything - where liberation came from listening to the text being read, thinking about them, meditating on them and so on. State funding institutionalised Buddhism into monasteries and universities - much as Constantine did to Christianity - and created a new form of Buddhism which emphasised intellectual learning and religious hierarchies. Early Buddhist monks wandered in groups no larger than three, lived and worshipped in close connection with the local communities on whom they depended for food and supplied services such as healing and spells for good harvests and so on. But for the monastics the text became everything in a kind of 'sola scriptora' approach. Attempts by modern Buddhists to re-find 'early Buddhism' fall into the trap of trying to abstract ideas from the texts and end up with a kind of desiccated secular mental exercise. Oddly to us moderns the closest thing to early Buddhism would be vajrayana even though it has much later historical roots. And it is the main criticism of vajrayana that it introduces magical, yogic and deity practices which places it much closer to what the Buddha was actually like.

From the intro this looks like a gem - thanks.

What makes them more immortal than just an archive?

ah! Soul.

I didn’t leave that out you added it after my reply.

I think perhaps there's something more sinister than that.

I wonder then how these ideas became so wooled up. And why? To pull the wool over our eyes? I started a thread before 'in praise of ideas' and this I think is what I was trying to get at. That subtle and powerful ideas properly applied are powerful and life changing (for want of a better phrase). The essence of the modern idea of a cult is specifically the misuse of such ideas to befuddle people into getting them to do what they want. Cult originally just meant the rituals of a particular god - the rites of that god particular to it and the place where it was worshiped.

Hsing = xing?

I have been associated with two groups over the years (now no longer) and my experience is that although the leaders did have charisma (and it is debatable how much of that charisma is simply due to being the leader/teacher/master etc. and how much is a personal attribute); in both the cases I experienced the leader was doing quite a lot to avoid forming a cult but generally failing. The drive towards cultish behaviour was coming chiefly from the students ... and if I may dare say it, the female ones and of them especially those 'close' to the teacher. Around them would be quite a large group of 50% sycophants and 50% genuine hard working devotees. Then there would be a larger group who were 'interested' and liked to hear the teachings and just wouldn't challenge what was coming from the inner groups for fear of ridicule or just sounding stupid etc. The drive towards cultish behaviour and attitudes came from the students and not so much the 'master'. But I would guess that many a not so genuine master would give in to this tendency quite easily. I recognise that there are also quite a number of people who deliberately set out to generate a cult around them - but I suspect these are the minority. The other fact or I have noticed in Tibetan Buddhism is an in-built encouragement to sheepishness. Not sheepishness but sheep like behaviour and a desire to wool up the message - that is make it deliberately confusing in subtle ways. This is particularly noticeable around subjects like no-self and emptiness. But mostly in the classic logical error of appeal to authority - and 'ask the master' or quoting him in response to any question particularly to draw any challenging conversation to an end. All these things are mostly unconscious and not intentionally malevolent - in fact they are intended to be helpful. But if you are genuinely 'seeking' they are not helpful (I think).

“Be bonkers in a cool way” you’ve just invented the DaoBums marketing strategy!

I forgive those what trespass against me. I have no idea what he did wrong but whatever it was he could simply pay a sizeable tribute in the form of cash and I shall be merciful.

Forgive him his trespasses.

Forgiveness for the bullies provided they rot in everlasting hell.

Yeah what’s an ADOS?

I can suggest three reasons: 1). The knowledge which the society holds is a state of being/consciousness which is not transmissible in intellectual terms and thus the society is automatically esoteric simply because this is the case. This is probably the essential reason. 2 ). In such a society the master and his students form a 'circle' (chakra) and they and their relative positions a mandala. Thus to join is to enter the mandala of the master/guru - this forms a special and exclusive relationship which allows teaching transmission to occur. Thus there are processes eg. vows, certain preliminary practices and so on to gain entry. This is not intended to exclude but simply to retain the purity and the energy in the circle such that the process of transmission can occur. 3). Given the first two points groups like this appear elitist and are often regarded with suspicion by outsiders - and especially the institutions of exoteric religion may see them as a threat to their exclusive holding of the hierophant's role in society generally. For this reason the society goes 'underground' and in order to protect itself from persecution and becomes even more secretive.

There is the option to kill you first then tell you.

ive read Wind up bird chronicle and Kafka on the shore - liked both of them.

Hi Healthy Bums, my latest eye test showed I have borderline high eye pressure which could lead to glaucoma. I was wondering if anyone knows any good qi gong or herbal remedies that might help me reduce the pressure before my next test. thanks!

Journey to the East is my fav Hesse.

Very pleased to report that after 3 months of sung/sinking qi and massaging around the eye sockets and at acupressure points my pressure has dropped to 16 for each eye (previously 22 and 24) - thanks to everyone for advice.