Vajrahridaya

This can be a dangerous practice if not done with the right partner. Generally your partner, unless you are deeply realized, has to have some level of spiritual realization. You have to know how to heat up your 2nd chakra area very intensely through breathing. Also knowing how to contemplate, at least in the Buddhist tradition the mixture of bliss that arises and it's empty nature in order to expand your awareness into subtler dimensions relaxes your entire being into the energy of the sexual experience. Basically you can integrate the memory of your meditative experiences instead if you don't have an understanding of emptiness. The sperm can actually still come out as waste while the energy is channeled through the central channel into subtler dimensions, though very little sperm will come out in this case, just to release and not block the channels. It's really about the energy and if you can totally burn it all before it produces sperm, then you are good. It does take practice and focus. So learning this focus in meditation first is going to be the way in order to open up into other dimensions of experience. You will have to already have consciousness of your spine and contemplations that go along with this experience in order to focus the energy. For me, I can just relax into it and contract nothing and just pull the energy up my spine by relaxing into the energy that is being produced in the tail bone, it actually happens naturally at this point. But I do have kundalini awakening since a kid, so that might really help. Other than that.. I'd say... contemplate what you really want out of this practice and meditate on the energy just as it is before you practice this. If you do it wrong you create stagnant energy in the wind channels that feels cold and somewhat poisonous, of which I've also experienced, all because you didn't channel it right and your mind was too externalized during the process thus forcing the ejaculate back in when it gets here is just going to cause issues, so releasing some is fine, that way you can focus on the energy and pull the yoni (vag) energy through your tip and up your spine while she does the same causing a natural cycling. It's really about contemplating meditative relaxation and integrating the sexual energy in with your meditative samadhi. Eyes rolling to the back of the head and elongated non-ejaculating orgasms while opening all your chakras is great though and you don't roll over and go to sleep afterwards either as the room will be filled with enlivened blue rays of incredible and open joy!

I don't disrespect people like this. I question peoples beliefs and stage of experience in the spiritual pursuit. I don't call people or their opinions hollow. I just say at most that they are incomplete and dismantle the belief system through debate. I mean hollow not hallow.

The truth is much subtler than this assumption that everything rests on a universal consciousness. "I think you are clouded by your beliefs Seth. I can say the same thing about you that your be"lie"f's lie to you. You think subtracting everything from awareness leaves God, cosmic awareness." This is exactly my opinion of you. I am not holding to beliefs outside of my own direct experience. My words are reflective of my insight. You and many others just don't have the karmic dimension to connect with what I say is all. There are others that do though. They find the words enlightening. You and many others here do not. It's quite subjective you see. No, I had a lot of time invested in believing as you do, to one degree or another. The contemplations on the teachings of the Muni actually cut through my previous assumptions and mis-interpretation of my experiences and what I saw and heard in deep meditative states and during seva or work or whatever as I revolved around the habit of leaning on a supreme identity of all things which creates many other subtle assumptions and mis-interpretations that I was not previously aware I was even doing. As I can see you doing right now in fact. An assumption. We as in vast amounts of mind streams did co-create the trees through unconscious manipulation of the elements from subtler dimensions before we even took body here, yes. But, a Buddhas treatment of consciousness and awareness is much subtler and nuanced in understanding, more omniscient that is, or rather... truly omniscient, as opposed to the Gods who think they created everything, even us as if it all was a single entity, when it's not. It is different, they have a different awareness and even if they were to eventually become human, and practiced meditation and experienced a formless state of Samadhi, they might or might not identify this as a cosmic Self. You do, I don't. Same experience, different non-conceptual interpretation. The Buddha subverted this interpretation. I've had many, many, countless experiences of oneness both in meditation and outside of meditation. I realized that this was a subtle mis-interpretation of expansive consciousness that is made possible due to the fact of emptiness, even if I wasn't aware of the fact of emptiness, which I wasn't for much of my sadhana. It feels like oneness to the subtle habit of clinging to a self, it's just a bigger and more blissful experience of this egoic habit pattern. The truth is much subtler than the "I AM" experience, or the all is "I" experience. All this arises inter-dependently, beyond theory... more as fact. Your idea of dependent origination being merely a conceptual model arises dependent upon your mis-interpretation of your own experiences of awareness or awareness conditioned by your level of experience.

Yes, I understand. You take the blank level of formless consciousness as the Self. I understand the leaning on this experience as the end all be all and how it blocks one from going deeper in investigation. I used to be blocked by such a bliss and love that felt ever present. It's just a state of expanded awareness that is possible due to the fact that phenomena and consciousness is empty of inherent existence so malleable. That light is blissful, but to lean on it as a Self of all is a block according to the Buddhas and according to my reluctant experience as well. Buddhism beyond my beliefs of it, made me very uncomfortable because I agreed with the universal consciousness as truth experience as beyond rebuke. I used to think that the Buddha taught the same thing as all the other mystics. But, I was really under mis-assumptions. "Yes it is. In unconscious states of sleep, I am not aware. Of course if I were enlightened these unconscious states of sleep would be filled with awareness as my dense karmas would have been wiped away through the practice of awareness. Also, in the state of infinite nothingness, I am not aware. It's only afterwards that I say... "Oh, there was nothing and no one aware", only in contrast to when I become aware. Are you always aware of the experience you are living? How about that mosquito that bite's you on the back of the leg while you are sleeping. Are you only aware of that when you wake up?" This is your assumptions based upon your interpretation of your experiences. You are wrong according to the Buddhas though. This has nothing to do with indoctrination, though you could use some study. This has to do with investigating more deeply your beliefs about awareness. More monist dogma. It exists within the awareness of many conscious beings as an inter-dependently co-created play of all sentient beings experiencing it. But awareness is not a single cosmic non-phenomena that the entire cosmos arises from. In my opinion, you are fooling yourself. You don't realize how much the traditions you have enjoyed has effected your interpretation of your experiences. Did you read that book by Venkatesananda? "Total Love"? He talks a lot like this... saying, "be-lie-f's" I really enjoyed his writings and they used to boost my belief in a cosmic consciousness and the experience of this as the truth. Even though I experienced the formless state of Samadhi very deeply before I read a single book on spirituality at the age of 14. Because I had no other form of interpretation in my influence as my mother was a Shaivite my entire life, I considered this experience an experience of God. I wondered around in an altered state of awareness for a week while at the ashram at 14, deeply effected by this direct experience beyond time, form and limitations and it was deeply blissful on a deeply peaceful level and I felt deeply connected to all things afterwards. It was very nice. But, I mis-interpreted the experience due to various causes and conditions. Yes it happens within my awareness. Some deities that follow me around are aware of much of what I experience as well. "In certain states of sleep we are not aware of the world and in certain states of meditative absorption we are not aware of the world at the same time that we are having these inner experiences. It is only through the fact of connecting moments and awareness of these that memory works. But awareness is NOT constant, even if consciousness is still available, but at times consciousness is repressed and stupor is experienced maybe in one state of sleep or meditation or another. Of course if you have constant awareness, even in deep sleep where you have illumination or your awareness goes to higher realms or you consort with various deities or whatever. That's fabulous. But, this doesn't mean that everything is made of one consciousness. All of it, including the elements and individual consciousness' arise and flows, cycles and evolves within the vastness of inter-dependent origination and is all empty of inherent existence." Yes, I do. Only when I become aware of experiencing do I contrast the non-experiencing of dreamless black sleep where the subtle elements that arise my consciousness recede into potentiality, and awareness is lost for a while during deep body rest. But the energy of body karma which is another type of consciousness pulsates my body even though my sense consciousness and dream consciousness receded into non-awareness in the subtle elements dulled by the darkness of my unconscious. I'm not that enlightened yet all the time where I am ever aware, even in deep dreamless sleep, only sometimes. My Rinpoche is though, he has 24 hour awareness. The Buddha didn't break down an individuals consciousness' into different aspects for no reason. I feel that you are under the sway of beliefs and assumptions. So... I do disagree with your assessment of me. As I very much have direct experience of many of the Buddhas statements. I spent many years meditating many hours a day and chanting many hours a day, avoiding movies, even friends other than passing spiritual conversations with spiritual minded folks. I was quite the shut in. A very blissful shut in though! I very intensely wanted to know the truth of things.

I know you feel threatened when your only retort is an ad-hominem. You should watch your own mind Dwai. You are trying to come off wise but it's just an overly worked out insult coming from inside of you. If you can't debate in a mature way and say something nice. Don't say anything at all, your karma will be better this way.

Wow... yeah dude. I remember telling people these things back in the mid nineties. People were like no... no way, it's all good! God will protect us! Well... I guess we will see. But all I know is that only a huge and massive change in the way the human race conducts itself on planet Earth will protect us on a mass scale. Hmmmn.

Of course it has qualities, just as you do and I do but it still all arises dependent upon causes and conditions add infinitum and is without inherent substance, only relative substance.

Because causes and effects are empty of inherent substance, there is malleability and the more your awareness realizes the empty quality of phenomena, the more free your choices will be from the constructions of history. But yes, in a way you are right as well. But how your awareness is in the inevitable influences the way the inevitable manifests, because your awareness influences your response system. So there is malleability. There is freedom... it's just realizing it is all.

"Luminous emptiness" only in as much as when your awareness realizes the empty quality of things, your mind shines luminously free from it's conditions. The luminosity is also empty of static self existence. So no, I do not qualify with inherent is-ness. The experience of luminosity still arises dependent upon realization of the empty nature of dependently arisen phenomena. I've already explained this to you ralis, but you don't remember or get the meaning. You are having trouble understanding the meaning of dependent origination. You are having a hard time making the leap in understanding from reading absolutes into the written terminology and not seeing the meaning relative to the statements. Look at what the words are pointing to. The universe only exists relatively based upon what is left over from the previous universe, so on and so forth add infinitum. You need some training in Madhyamaka. Dependent Origination Madhyamaka and Pratityasamutpada See also: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Though the formulations above appear might seem to imply that pratityasamutpada is a straightforward causal model, in the hands of the Madhyamaka school, pratityasamutpada is used to demonstrate the very lack of inherent causality, in a manner that appears somewhat similar to the ideas of David Hume. Many scholars have agreed that the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is one of the earliest interpretations of Buddha's teaching on paramartha originated from Pratītyasamutpāda [18][clarification needed] , [19][clarification needed]. The conclusion of the Madhyamikas is that causation, like being, must be regarded as a merely conventional truth (saṃvṛti), and that to take it as really (or essentially) existing would be both a logical error and a perceptual one, arising from ignorance and a lack of spiritual insight. According to the analysis of Nāgārjuna, the most prominent Madhyamika, true causality depends upon the intrinsic existence of the elements of the causal process (causes and effects), which would violate the principle of anatman, but pratītyasamutpāda does not imply that the apparent participants in arising are essentially real. Because of the interdependence of causes and effects (because a cause depends on its effect to be a cause, as effect depends on cause to be an effect), it is quite meaningless to talk about them as existing separately. However, the strict identity of cause and effect is also refuted, since if the effect were the cause, the process of origination could not have occurred. Thus both monistic and dualistic accounts of causation are rejected. Therefore Nāgārjuna explains that the śūnyatā (or emptiness) of causality is demonstrated by the interdependence of cause and effect, and likewise that the interdependence (pratītyasamutpāda) of causality itself is demonstrated by its anatta. In his Entry to the middle way, Candrakirti asserts, "If a cause produces its requisite effect, then, on that very account, it is a cause. If no effect is produced, then, in the absence of that, the cause does not exist."

Consciousness in Buddhism is the individual potential for awareness and arises over and over again for a Samsarin from ignorance. The cosmos does not arise out of wisdom with all it's suffering. The cycling happens out of ignorance, including the arising of an individual consciousness. Ignorance is the cause. When wisdom of the nature of the cycle being empty of inherent existence arises, one becomes a Buddha and one can manifest a pure realm that has the cause of wisdom in relation to there being ignorance. Hinduism says that the cosmos arises from God's bliss. Buddha does not agree. Bliss in Buddhism arises from wisdom. According to Buddhism, primordial wisdom is not consciousness, but arises as a result of the conscious awareness of all things having and always being empty of inherent existence and constant awareness of this arises wisdom of the primordial nature of all things. Consciousness is not considered the primordial nature of all things. Actually yes in explanation, like anything, but the experience of DO is deeply intuitive and the non-substantial non-conceptual, non-dual, so called "one taste" arises in a beings awareness through the intuitive comprehension of DO. Here... for further reading and clarification... Pratityasamutpada on Wiki Madhyamaka and Pratityasamutpada See also: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā Though the formulations above appear might seem to imply that pratityasamutpada is a straightforward causal model, in the hands of the Madhyamaka school, pratityasamutpada is used to demonstrate the very lack of inherent causality, in a manner that appears somewhat similar to the ideas of David Hume. Many scholars have agreed that the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is one of the earliest interpretations of Buddha's teaching on paramartha originated from Pratītyasamutpāda. The conclusion of the Madhyamikas is that causation, like being, must be regarded as a merely conventional truth (saṃvṛti), and that to take it as really (or essentially) existing would be both a logical error and a perceptual one, arising from ignorance and a lack of spiritual insight. According to the analysis of Nāgārjuna, the most prominent Madhyamika, true causality depends upon the intrinsic existence of the elements of the causal process (causes and effects), which would violate the principle of anatman, but pratītyasamutpāda does not imply that the apparent participants in arising are essentially real. Because of the interdependence of causes and effects (because a cause depends on its effect to be a cause, as effect depends on cause to be an effect), it is quite meaningless to talk about them as existing separately. However, the strict identity of cause and effect is also refuted, since if the effect were the cause, the process of origination could not have occurred. Thus both monistic and dualistic accounts of causation are rejected. Therefore Nāgārjuna explains that the śūnyatā (or emptiness) of causality is demonstrated by the interdependence of cause and effect, and likewise that the interdependence (pratītyasamutpāda) of causality itself is demonstrated by its anatta. In his Entry to the middle way, Candrakirti asserts, "If a cause produces its requisite effect, then, on that very account, it is a cause. If no effect is produced, then, in the absence of that, the cause does not exist." Pratityasamutpada in Dzogchen In Dzogchen tradition the interdependent origination (of suffering) is considered illusory: [One says], "all these (configurations of events and meanings) come about and disappear according to dependent origination." But, like a burnt seed, since a nonexistent (result) does not come about from a nonexistent (cause), cause and effect do not exist. What appears as a world of apparently external phenomena, is the play of energy of sentient beings. There is nothing external or separate from the individual. Everything that manifests in the individual's field of experience is a continuum. This is the Great Perfection that is discovered in the Dzogchen practice. "Being obsessed with entities, one's experiencing itself [sems, citta], which discriminates each cause and effect, appears as if it were cause and condition." Dependent arising of enlightenment Pratityasamutpada is most commonly used to explain how suffering arises depending on certain conditions, the implication being that if one or more of the conditions are removed (if the "chain" is broken), suffering will cease. There is also a text, the Upanisa Sutta in the Samyutta Nikaya, in which a discussion of the conditions not for suffering but for enlightenment are given. This application of the principle of dependent arising is referred to in Theravada exegetical literature as "transcendental dependent arising". The chain in this case is: suffering (dukkha) faith (saddhā) joy (pāmojja, pāmujja) rapture (pīti) tranquillity (passaddhi) happiness (sukha) concentration (samādhi) knowledge and vision of things as they are (yathābhūta-ñāna-dassana) disenchantment with worldly life (nibbidā) dispassion (virāga) freedom, release, emancipation (vimutti, a synonym for nibbana) knowledge of destruction of the cankers (āsava-khaye-ñāna)

No, you are not wrong, as awareness arises dependent upon the practices, you untie the deeply imbedded knots that reside in and as your consciousness, thereby uncompounding your awareness of both you and the cosmos. As it's all equally empty, nothing really is above anything else, but in the process of time of course there is cause and effect and the effect becomes a cause for another effect within a vast and infinite net of inter-co-arisings. Your consciousness arises in and through the net of inter-dependency. Reading Abhidharma would help Seth to understand what the Buddha is getting at and why Nagarjuna said that most paths lead to the edge of Samsara but Buddhadharma leads beyond Samsara, and not in the sense that there is a place beyond Samsara, but that Buddhadharma teaches how one can experience Samsara as Nirvana by turning the DO link of ignorance into wisdom.

Yes, you can. Awareness is not a thing in the sense of elements, but it does arise due to a configuration of elements, it's very deep and complex how a human gives rise to consciousness, then has awareness to one degree or another. While on the other hand animals, bugs... etc. They all have consciousness but not awareness to the degree that a human being does. Rocks, don't have consciousness at all, but are still made of sound and are arisings of collections of thought co-ordinating the basic elements into coagulation as a rock over and over again through endless time and evolution. It's so deep and complex to have a direct experience of what dependent origination means, but it can all be understood in a single moment beyond concrete thought. According to Hinduism, a rock is made of consciousness in a dense form. But, Buddhism does not see this way. Hinduism takes the expansive consciousness that happens in meditative states where the individuals awareness permeates space through the fact of emptiness as a ground of all being. Buddha called this a mis-interpretation of the experience. No, you don't have to believe, but you have to transcend your current interpretation of your experiences in spiritual pursuit thus far in order to understand what the Buddha was getting at and why he said the Vedas are not authoritative. Also why he said that interpreting a cosmic Self into the cycling of the cosmos is just a high level delusion. He did say these things and there is a reason why. In Buddhism, awareness is indeed a phenomena, but it is the phenomena that makes Buddhahood possible. Yes it is. In unconscious states of sleep, I am not aware. Of course if I were enlightened these unconscious states of sleep would be filled with awareness as my dense karmas would have been wiped away through the practice of awareness. Also, in the state of infinite nothingness, I am not aware. It's only afterwards that I say... "Oh, there was nothing and no one aware", only in contrast to when I become aware. Are you always aware of the experience you are living? How about that mosquito that bite's you on the back of the leg while you are sleeping. Are you only aware of that when you wake up? Your belief system allows for many assumptions that do not make sense upon deeper investigation. Because you have consciousness, does not mean you are aware. Through the practice you do develop more awareness. It is a phenomena that arises dependent upon practice. Buddhadharma is a paradigm shift from the philosophy you think explains everything so well. You think these are beliefs, but Buddhism is a deeply intuitive process of methods for the sake of unraveling ones true potential and the philosophy that expresses the findings. In certain states of sleep we are not aware of the world and in certain states of meditative absorption we are not aware of the world at the same time that we are having these inner experiences. It is only through the fact of connecting moments and awareness of these that memory works. But awareness is NOT constant, even if consciousness is still available, but at times consciousness is repressed and stupor is experienced maybe in one state of sleep or meditation or another. Of course if you have constant awareness, even in deep sleep where you have illumination or your awareness goes to higher realms or you consort with various deities or whatever. That's fabulous. But, this doesn't mean that everything is made of one consciousness. All of it, including the elements and individual consciousness' arise and flows, cycles and evolves within the vastness of inter-dependent origination and is all empty of inherent existence. I think you are clouded by your beliefs Seth. I can say the same thing about you that your be"lie"f's lie to you. You think subtracting everything from awareness leaves God, cosmic awareness. But how deeply aware of the cosmos are you, personally? Where is the proof that there is this God that wills everything to be and is the underlying principle behind everything outside of having experiences of expansive consciousness and deities whispering in your ears saying this is so? Yes, there are Gods that have vast awareness, some think that they created everything out of being the first born. I know, I remember being a God like this and having this vast awareness. But, the truth is, is that as vast as my awareness was, it was not the same level of awareness of a Buddha. I was un-aware of other universes and other dimensions outside of my own experience. But, others were not un-aware, and others were aware of me as I was aware of lots and lots of beings traversing through my domain like ants on a table. Many ants are not aware of your presence as you stand above them, watching them come and go, until you put your finger next to one of them. Awareness is a phenomena. Our consciousness permeates our body but we are not always aware of all the nooks and crannies of it. Our consciousness is a conditioned and karmic arising. How conscious is a tree body? Of course our mind stream is subtler than our physical body and our body arises within the karmic stream of our individual mind. You do all the time. Your body consciousness is having the experience of walking on thousands of micro-organisms, but are you aware of it all the time? Inter-dependent origination is not a theory. It's how the cosmos works. It's deeply subtle, more complex, profound and simple than you are aware of.

You didn't get what I said. Basically, awareness which is a product of consciousness, takes place within endless interdependent origination. Until you have a direct experience of inter-dependent origination beyond concepts, you will not understand. It must be contemplated upon. Including the formless states of samadhi and integration of these states through the wrong view of top down metaphysics. God being the top and everything else being the down. Because you take up the state of concept-less awareness, one of the formless states as a source of everything, you miss the wisdom of the muni. Your awareness is a product of your consciousness, which arises dependent upon the DO chain of events within a very subtle span of experience like spanda, moment to moment. But, you take up awareness of this through a sense of focus or surrender as a Self and you miss the point of the teaching. Your awareness of DO must also be emptied through DO thereby one doesn't even grasp at the experience of Buddhahood as an abiding Self, this to is relative. It's the mis-interpretation of your own experience that clouds your ability to read what I have written. Awareness is increased through wisdom and decreased through lack of wisdom. Through prajna your awareness expands, or through samadhi as well, even without prajna, but then this is where Hindus get it wrong and take up the result of meditative focus or surrender to the bliss expansion experience as a Self. It does seem as so when as you come down from the formless states everything seems to coagulate as if from the light of your experience. But, this is just an experience of consciousness expanding awareness made possible through the fact of non-inherent existence of everything, thus consciousness can proliferate beyond the individual who is empty through a focus of awareness, because everything is really transparent, including consciousness. You will need to contemplate this and not just brush it away with the top down theory you identify with, where you think that everything is a product of one awareness through a process of metaphysical densification and proliferation of multiples through the will of this one awareness to become many, for the sake of lila or play? DO of the Buddhas intuition does transcend "that" interpretation.

Any symbol be it mundane or spiritual interpreted through intuitive experience of co-dependent origination/emptiness is liberated upon cognition anyway.

Basically, even what arises in my awareness is based upon other Buddhas and Samsarins, and they too to the next endlessly. Their experience of formless or form levels of consciousness and awareness of consciousness is unique until Buddhahood, then this is shared omnipresent/omniscience due to having the same realization of the nature of things. But, even then each individual expression of a liberated mind stream as a Buddha is unique due to unique conscious experiences and the free awareness' expression of this based upon this individual infinitude of experience since beginningless time being offered to endless others through Nirvana as endless time, anchored in the awareness of uncompounded beyond such dual notions. This is a non-substantial non-dual realization not based upon the experience of there being one consciousness.

An individual consciousness that emanates awareness to the degree that it is free from itself, dependent upon it's taking in influence from Buddhas. We all arise as cycles of individual conscious sentient beings based upon everyone else, so this is also empty of essential self. Ones consciousness breeds more and more awareness dependent upon it's level of liberation from selfhood and the individual consciousness arises dependent upon everyone else's unique and infinite mindstream based upon a particular congruence of the elements. The realization is simpler complexity of course. But, taking up awareness as an ultimate Self of all beings in a singular fashion is a mistake if true liberation from unconscious recycling is your goal. Of course if bliss for many eons is your goal, then you are in the right direction. The Buddha (awake) bliss is much clearer and deeper though. I used to believe as you do with all the experiences to back it up, but there is a more profound interpretation of these experiences and thus there is a subtler kind of non-experience to be experienced beyond Nirguna Brahman or Shaivite version of Sahaja Samadhi which is based upon an attachment to a singular entity behind all entities. Vajra Samadhi is subtler, and without substance, so totally free and unbounded to another degree. Don't take up the expansive state of consciousness based upon merit and focus/surrender as a substratum if you wish to understand what the Buddha meant by Nirvana.

There is really nothing to gain, since everything is already unbound by the fact that it is empty of inherent existence. So not even now is graspable as ultimate reality. There is just the flow of mutually dependent ideations fed upon by endless belief in it as so, this will be endless as it is beginningless. Be liberated from it and through it or not. Emptiness is not nothingness. There is no nothingness, but merely as an idea of contrast that if focused upon brings about that state of meditation of infinite nothingness, but that to has no inherent existence. Nothingness is also empty of inherent being. No, Buddhadharma shows a much more complex cosmos and a much more layered view of what can happen for endless individuals than what you would be used to without studying what the Buddha actually taught through and through. On this Earth.. I disagree. But everyone has their own path to a truly liberating path, and what is helpful is what is needed for an individual on the path to a truly liberating path. Be it Taoism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Paganism... etc. Even every Buddhist who attains Buddhahood, even if it were to be the Jalus or Rainbow Body (link to explanation) each one who realizes this type of Buddhahood integrates this very same realization in a unique way with their own unique set of karmic baggage to be liberated as such.

No, there is just connection, no self. Yes, your awareness goes omnipresent, but it is not attached to as a self. At this stage one must empty even emptiness. There is deeper than this idea I have quoted of yours above. Your self is relative to everything yes, but if you really recognize what the Buddha was saying about inter-dependence, and emptiness, then you go deeper than this as well. There also is no inherent universe to be relative to. Reading some Nagarjuna is helpful in understanding what the Buddha taught on emptiness and inter-dependency. See in Buddhism we don't surrender to the universe, we surrender to the Dharma, the teaching of liberation from the universe, while realizing that the universe is now Nirvana for the realized. We don't take refuge in the cosmos, we take refuge in the being liberated from it, even though the cosmos produced this possibility as well. As a servant to help free others endlessly. Whao... that was a total projection. That was not my intention. I was glaring at the fact that this happens to me as well, then I'm just letting it go in closed eye half smile meditation. That was my intention... Because we are because of them on the relative level. emptiness does not mean nothing. It means constant malleability. Emptiness means nothing is static, unless one realizes that nothing is static all the time, then that realization is permanent. What makes everything work is the fact of suffering, movement out of the longing for completion, but since suffering beings are endless, so is the service of those that freed themselves from suffering. So also what makes it all work is that there is in fact a way to end suffering and the examples of this way are endless, but examples of the pitfalls both high and low are endless as well. Those that freed themselves from suffering completely and totally move out of the motivation of compassion for the endless that suffer, even though they are also free from this as well as there are really no beings at all. Because something that arises due to something else has no self to arise from other than this relativity, it is as if it didn't arise at all from an absolute perspective.

So unlimited one could hardly call it a collective. This would be a mis-interpretation of his intentions. He meant that self is only always relative. There is not an absolute self. There is an absolute level of realizing the relative, as in always aware of the nature that change is which leads to freedom from passion while engaged fully for the benefit of all. Not abandoning, but understanding fully inter-connectivity on an infinite scale, both intellectually and experientially The mirror like nature of mind, still arises inter-dependently and not independently. When one looses oneself in the focus on this illumination aspect, and calls this the real self or abode of all things, then one is merely re-absorbed into this at the end of the karma for this cosmic eon and true liberation is not realized, only formless bliss then unconscious rebirth into the next universe as the cycle begins again. Buddhism is about knowing how to deal with the particulars in a way to keep consciously manifesting endlessly for the sake of others, but also out of just sheer longing for self-liberation. It's just that you get to a point where it stops being selfish and starts being for the sake of all beings and inter-connectivity is realized more and more deeply. They reveal naturally as the unconscious is illumined. Ok, yes.. but how to always be conscious and make ones infinite unconscious completely conscious is what Buddhism is about... no more mystery, outside of course of constant spontaneity.

The 4 noble truths include the 8 fold path, which includes right view. This means understanding mutual co-origination and emptiness as well as anatman or no-inherent-self or essence to anything. See this constitutes a belief in a real and true self and will to the entire cosmos. This does not hold up to the Buddhas scrutiny. No worries, it happens to me all the time. In Buddhism the sacrifice just has to do with realizing no-self and offering all will and merits to the upliftment of others, either now or in the future by sewing seeds of liberation, even if it seems disagreeable in the now. Buddhism seems to be the only path that breaks down this, "spirit" into it's most subtle components and then finds that there is nothing absolute there to grasp at as well. Experience goes on and on endlessly. In Buddha interpretation, Samsara is beginningless for an individual, but once Nirvana is realized, this is endless. I used to believe as you. When I studied all the worlds religions vehemently without giving much time to the most volumes... Buddhism. I used to only read from here and there out of context from really bad translations. Then I was schooled by an experienced scholar accredited from an Eastern school to a high degree. Then I met a great Rinpoche, and then I met many others after that both in dream and physically. Anyway... it's not that an individual cannot realize the same truth as the Buddha without being Buddhist. But... it's just that as a spiritual tradition, Buddhism offers the most clear explanations and methodology that appear on this planet with the most beings who have realized actual Buddhahood and not just intermediate bliss states of great power like in many other traditions.

To feel that humility is a lesson in and of itself. To feel that surrender to the dharma is a lesson in and of itself. Open the meridians towards an ideation of your own highest nature manifest as a human being right before you as a mirror. No, it's just your energy flows out through your feet. It's an energy karma thing. If you are realized, you can also transcend this, even with a little realization. But, it's still good to honor. The Lama if qualified is a intermediary on a level you have yet to comprehend. Unless your mind is open, you won't feel the incredible joy of it all. Mostly, because it was considered very hard for women to focus on spiritual needs due to physical stuff like giving birth and care taking for the children. Of course, in modern times, this is being over turned... which is very good. It's not a threat. You just get what you make, as you sew you reap. There is nothing you get without earning it in this life or the next. You are completely mis-understanding the teaching out of fear. Whoever taught you in this way seems to be quite stern and literal. This is very silly. But, you do have your own karmas. I've never met a Lama like this in my life. Your take is very limited to a very limited level of experience and interpretation.

There is no infinite whole. Most of your assumptions arise from this very deep and subtle assumption. Not as an ontological essence though. Just as a way things move as things are, not as a thing behind the things which the TTC boasts of. The Tao as the mother of all things, and the beginning before things are... etc. This treatment of a WAY does not hold up to Buddhas scrutiny. There is nothing uncharted per say, only a new expression of the same. Maybe, I don't know you that well and I don't know what you have studied and experienced. Voice as in energy, the sound of your being. There doesn't seem to be in Taoism a clear example of what the WAY is? Not as clearly as it appears through the Dharma that is. Everything seems to be metaphorical, allegorical? Of course if you are karmically driven towards this path and have not experienced deeply any other path, you will not know, as you will have no memory of anything else to compare it to. I do... as I remember lifetimes. But... just do well and be well! It seems that you do. Your future will be good, even after death.

What is life itself, how does it do what it does? Where is it going? Where did the you that you are today really come from and how?

There is nothing beyond mind/body, except the realization of emptiness which is not a thing, but just an understanding. Emptiness is a way of interpreting that leads to expansive states of mind and the recognition of endless luminosity due to the fact that mind is just light, clear light. What the Hindu's consider beyond the mind, is actually just another manifestation of mind according to Buddhism (awake ones teachings). What you are is an ongoing stream of relativity. The Hindu's want to say there is something unchanging and static that is real beyond the "unreal" of the manifest... this is considered by them the Self of all. For Buddhists, this is just a prolonged state of focus. Mistaking this expanded state of mind that comes through intense focus or intense "surrender" to an infinite concept beyond concepts, as an unchanging essence, merely leads to future unknowing rebirth, as apposed to those that take rebirth consciously for the sake of others. This meditative or contemplative experience is known in Hinduism as "Atman" or Self and known in Taoism as the "Tao." It is very blissful and the tendency of the mind is to say, "this is my true self"! Or this is the true beyond the beyond nature of everything. It's a very, very deep tendency. This attachment is what keeps one cycling endlessly, from bliss realms to dense realms like this to even denser realms than this and back up to bliss realms, over and over again as each new big bang manifests a similar experience as this universe. The Hindus just say liberation is, you attain God, and you are re-absorbed back into God at the end of the cosmic eon (during the pralaya or big crunch), but before that you get to play in a high heaven realm for a while in bliss with your chosen deity. The Buddhas go to other universes consciously to teach the Dharma and are not re-absorbed and also may manifest a merit realm for other beings who follow the Buddha dharma and focus on it to go to until they also attain Buddhahood. I've been to many of these realms spoken of in the texts. My faith is not blind. There are many, many realms to be visited in meditation. Don't know if I should be saying this.. but why not? It's true. So there you have it in a quick nutshell. The dangers of meditation is basically that you can be fooled by your meditative experience without the "right view" that is a buffer to save one from mis-interpretation of spiritual experiences. On this Earth, it's only Buddhadharma that really goes into detail about what this, "right view" is. It's not merely conceptual, it's quite deep as it extends into the formless states of bliss, or nirguna samadhi's, and empties them of their power to bind, unlike in Hinduism where they call these states, "The Self". Or in Taoism as well where they call it, "The nameless"... The above has been edited for clarity.