Vajrahridaya

If that's your take on it... so be it. I've experienced what you call the underlying reality. The Buddha did as well. He called it the Jhana of neither perception nor non-perception, or beyond being and non-being. If you read the Buddhas teachings and don't have an intuitive experience of it... directly... and instead you cling to an ultimate Self? That is your self created destiny then. If you truly read your history, you can see that there are no clear realizers before the Shakya Muni in this era. He did say there were other Buddhas before him, some that are solitary realizers but don't teach. There was also a path of Buddhadharma before him, but it had died off, because of people like Shankara, not only the Muslims, who went around destroying Buddhist temples, a little known fact, because he thought it was blasphemy to have a spiritual path without God, manifest by a being who said the Vedas were not the ultimate teaching. I can understand the attachment to an ultimate Self of all, it's a very deep one. Brahma does in fact manifest as a living being or a god according to the Vedas. Brahma is in fact a person, a first born due to merit left over from the previous universe. Read your Hinduism if you don't believe me. You can in fact meet Brahma in deep meditation.

You have many habits of hypocritical expression. Greetings... insult, insult, insult... be well. You could use a systematic approach to your own mind.

You will not get liberation by following your own habit patterns ingrained over countless lifetimes. You will only realize liberation by following the teachings and guidance of those already liberated. Those that see objectively because they are not attached to a self. One find's clarity through the example of the clear, not the muddled. Group effort with group intention towards the same goal brings about a powerful movement of energy that clarifies if the goal is made clear through learning from those that exist as mirrors of the highest truths. The cosmos only works one way. Everything originates dependently and is empty of inherent existence. There is no inherent Tao, unless one thinks of the Tao as the way things flow mutually dependent upon each other without inherent beingness as some Chan Masters translate the Tao to mean. Not some non-conceptual essence that is the background for all things. This type of mysteriousness is a reflection of ignorance and a lack of investigation. More muddled poetic nonsense. Lets understand how things work and see the particulars in how they are caused and how they effect endlessly through an awareness made open and pristine, clear and free through the practices handed down by the realized, not the ignorant. Through studying the mind with the guidance of mind masters, you can understanding the particulars of how the mind functions and how the body comes into process from subtler dimensions. You see how your self experience is created through endless karmic links, just as the individual self that creates the individual process is created as well by a mixture of inner and outer add infinitum. Study some Abhidharma! You can unravel the knotted seed of unconscious existence through the mind pointing of the truly liberated, not by ones own bound ignorance. As the mind unravels itself by going from body (dense) practice to voice (energy) practice to mind (nature of emptiness) directly, through the guidance of "right view" the first of the 8 fold noble path, you can see how it's not only meditation that reveals the truth of things. From physical, to energetic to emptiness, one realizes fullness... only by the guidance of the liberated, not the bound. Then you should learn about it as you don't seem to know much about what he taught except through some passing passages taken out of context. Then find a truly liberated lineage and get transmission and humble yourself under the guidance of a true master/disciple relationship. Otherwise it's all just lip service. It's the same in martial arts if you truly wish to learn, you need transmission from a truly skilled lineage, and that energy supports. Everyone travels the same path uniquely... of course. But, it takes a master of emptiness to see fully how and where another is bound from within and guide someone in a way that is particular to the individuals sensibilities.

It just came about naturally after people questioned my first posts in this thread.

It's a spiritual path with a specific goal, specific outcomes for the individual mind stream. I've never thought of it as a religion in the Western sense but a tradition of methods used specifically for the outcome of completely awakening one's self to the nature of everything. Not every path teaches with the same results. The goal of shop class and Buddha Dharma are very different, unless one is using shop class in conjunction with dharma contemplation. But this would be in conjunction with vipassana, or Dzogchen practice of integrating the state of Rigpa with every day ordinary life. Learn what the Buddha taught and realize it first. Even after the Buddha realized the nature of things, he still taught the Dharma in specific ways never wavering from the 4 marks which sets the Buddha Dharma as different from other spiritual traditions.

It's not an absolute judgement. It's more of a relative discernment based upon your conduct towards me and other Buddhists here. There are reasons why you choose to say the things you do and the Avatar you chose and the name you chose... etc. You have made many, many judgements and personal attacks.

Nothing says more about a person than seeing what they get joy from.

That's where dependent origination comes in, the view. So all meditative experiences, including those where one thinks there is a primal source are transcended. This is exactly why view is important so that one doesn't get fooled by meditative experiences. Even though... they do happen and they are hardly hallucinations. You can claim as such, but you are wrong. Of course life can be considered a kind of agreed upon, co-originated hallucination. Most people aren't ready for it. I find you dogmatic, limited, authoritarian, and ostentatious. The thing is, is that I know you are wrong about Buddhism, as your mind didn't open. Your mental dogmas are in the way. I do know that I am right about you though. 2 years of you following me around with your negative syrup. No, clearly you don't. So many people do it but don't get it, your just one of the countless many. It took a lot of questioning to come to Buddhism. More than you know. That's your own fear speaking as I've never met a Lama that felt that way. It must be your karma... You will not learn anything from me and I will only learn patience from you. I don't know why you keep harping on, chasing me around with nothing of real importance to say?

We've had this discussion before. The mechanistic school does not include luminous emptiness, the 31 realms and much other such things. Now you can prove it through meditation. If you want physical evidence, you will be hard pressed. The Buddha actually does say that there is no primal cause and that cycling is beginningless. You should study more of what the Buddha taught if you are going to make such claims. The chain of dependent origination has no beginning, as he taught. You merely flip it from samsaric to nirvanic.

On the contrary he spent 40 years preaching what he called Buddhadamma. He taught the 4 noble truths first, then the 8 fold noble path, he debated with scholars and yogi's of the time, he created an order of monks as well as rules of conduct within the monkhood. He also taught lay disciples and an order of conduct within the lay community. He taught so, so much including the foundations of the Mahayana while he was alive. He taught quite a lot more than breathing techniques. He did teach about the many levels of Jhana or Samadhi as well as dependent origination. He also taught vipassana. He is the only teacher that taught dependent origination and emptiness. You need to read some more about the history of what the Buddha taught. He is also the only teacher that set out to establish the beginning of an entire spiritual tradition that would last beyond his physical life. He was far more important of a teacher.

It's an important quality to mention during debate which sets Buddhism apart. It is a truth that subverts the deep seated attachment to the idea of a source and essence to everything. This idea re-occurs on a deep seated level of every mind stream that has been cycling since time immemorable. Dependent upon this idea and deeply subtle experience the seed for a persons cycling in Samsara is originated, over and over again. So yes, it is a kind of catch phrase for me. If it rubs you the wrong way. This is not my intention, but there is a source to the disturbance.

Oh Dwai... it was very easy to cut and paste the majority of that from online, quite effortless. It still stands, the Buddha pulled the rug from under the Upanishadic interpretation of the how and the why the universe cycles as well as what constitutes true liberation. Just as you would say Hindu Yoga transcends the methodology of Christian Mystics like St. John of the Cross and St. Francis of Assisi.

Oh, I read your posts. I learn from your posts how great it is to be on the Buddhist path!

Rigpa 5 Element Tigle! AH, the primordial Ati (light) yoga (union) AH, is the union of clarity and emptiness; awareness which is ultimate Bodhichitta (awakened consciousness) AH, abiding in the indivisible, uncontrived state of great bliss AH, without distraction or meditation is the expanse of Dharmakaya (body of dharma), free of extremes! Only for the sake of clarity. The truths which Buddhism points to does transcend the methodology that brings one there. But! Buddhism seems to be the only path on Earth that actually, and eloquently transcends the two extremes of Eternalism and Nihilism and makes this view important while taking up a path of meditation and contemplation. Most all spiritual paths including yours falls into Eternalism and take up meditation and the experiences which arise through meditation as the path and miss the "view" that is needed to sift through the experiences, even the formless, concept free samadhi's or states of reference which lead one to believe in an all encompassing absolute Truth which exists from it's own side and is Eternal without support. Satanism obviously falls into Nihilism and other cults like this as well are materialist forms of Nihilism. Buddhism does as a spiritual tradition seem to be the only path on Earth which transcends the Eternalist and Nihilist paths. To me and many others you just expose your own self imposed limitations and mis-understandings. I am glad that you are wrong for Buddhisms sake. For your own sake though, I am not happy that you are wrong. I wish you well as well.

This is basically "monism". All things are one thing. This is what the Buddha called the mis-understanding of experience interpreted as Eternalism. This is why you don't understand what the Buddha taught, because you are clinging to a supreme source and background to all of existence that shines from it's own side and which makes all things possible and is in fact all things in it's shining. This is contrary to how the cosmos actually works on deeper levels. Though your view and interpretation of experience is a part of the universe and part of how it works, it's an incomplete view that does not lead to total clarity. The experiences that support your view are considered mis-cognitions or mis-interpretations of spiritual experience that merely lead to higher rebirth but not genuine liberation from the egg of Samsaric existence. All that you have said I have heard before, and I have upheld before as the truth of things. I used to agree with you TzuJanLi. But, I had a deeper experience that showed a deeper view and interpretation of the very same spiritual experiences that you interpret internally beyond concept in the way you just pronounced. I only came to this experience through the influence of the Shakya Muni having taken birth and taught the "Sanatana Dharma". Dharma also is translated at times as "the way". Take care.

There is no absolute Truth in Buddhist interpretation of the universe. Thus Buddhism stands different from all other traditions. The Buddha is the only one that really taught a tradition of methodology and contemplation that leads to the same realization. All other paths are muddled. The Buddha did in fact teach Buddhism on all it's levels. Hinayana and Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana and Dzogchen. The Buddha was very systematic, though deeply abstract as well. He was very clear and did nothing but teach for 40 years, then also after leaving the body as well. You have yet to understand what the Buddha spoke so your ideas about Buddhism are based upon a lack of understanding so do not hold up to scrutiny. This idea of YOU are That or a Truth that exists absolutely and universally from it's own side... etc. This is the faulty perspective that the Buddha cuts through with no-self and inter-dependent origination/emptiness. This makes the Buddhas teachings different from what generally comes natural to most people, which is just different levels of Samsara. Samsara is a deep net and it's very difficult to get free from, because there are all sorts of pleasurable, peaceful and blissful pitfalls and most traditions are stuck at one or another of these pitfalls. Why? Because it's "natural". So, Buddhism in a sense does transcend what is natural.

Yes, mainly. Though there is no Taoist view really that is universal as there is no one source for the tradition. It's quite a scattered tradition with all sorts of lineages coming up with different views and interpretations. All of Buddhism, even if different on the surface is qualified by certain universal marks known as the 4 marks. What we are saying is that Buddhism leads to freedom from conditioning while utilizing conditions for the benefit of all. Most paths fall into an extreme of Eternalism mistaking a formless samadhi "condition" as an ultimate truth of things. Calling this concept-less state of being by many names and making it an ultimate Self or true transcendent nature of things. This is considered an erroneous view and a very common mistake of most all traditions that work in a top down kind of metaphysics. The Buddha spoke up against this in order to help people. Most traditions think of the universe as coming from a truly existing transcendent "it" or "that" of some sort... calling it formless, beyond change, beyond concepts but facilitating change and all concepts at the same time... etc. This is considered an erroneous view and the extreme of Eternalism. I don't pretend to be a Buddha, but I'm here to clarify my view, understanding and challenge my own sense of ego grasping. It's fun to write as well. I like it! I'm here to work out my conditions. Learn how to express. I try to bring about the sense of compassion. It may not always be apparent, but challenging other peoples views on a forum where you can't see people directly seems a little impersonal, so it's difficult to tell who's feeling compassion or not. I find that the interpretation of the Tao which Lau Tzu talks about in the TTC is flawed. He calls it a nameless source of things, the mother of things, the beginner... etc. So basically he's talking about a top down metaphysics where all things come from one truly existing thing that shines from it's own side. So, this does not stand up to what the Buddha taught. There are other interpretations of the Tao by Zen teachers that I can agree with. Tao just means "the way" which can be loosely translated as "Dharma" in sanskrit as well. It's not that the experiences aren't valid. It's just how the experience is interpreted internally which can lead to further bondage or just fuel to go deeper. Like Muhammed for instance had a vision in a cave, and interpreted that vision as the end all be all so went out and started conquering people in the name of this "vision" he had in a cave. Of course if he was guided by a Buddhist teacher, he would have seen through this vision and gone deeper and maybe came out of the cave a more compassionate being instead of deluded by this vision of an Asura. More here on the 31 planes of existence and how they correspond to different states of absorption in strictly meditative paths that do not have the "right view" as the Buddha taught. We don't attack every view. I don't at least. I only enter debates that pull me. You can take it or leave it. You can engage or enrage or move on yourself. Are you reading the same posts? He constantly attacks the Buddha and us Buddhists at almost every turn. Even somewhat personally. This is a place to discuss everything. Where views can be challenged and our state of equilibrium is put under fire. There is also sometimes the sense of camaraderie.

That is correct. My understanding has no inherent existence, it arises relative to everything else.

Where does the Tao fit in this then if everything is inter-dependent?

Brilliant work CowTao! This is why when one falls into this idea that... "Everything is" truly "this" or "that". No matter how transcendent this "that" is. It's still an extreme and one does not realize the true nature of things and how things revolve. Though error on the side of Eternalism is generally more helpful than Nihilism as Eternalism generally leads to higher rebirth and Nihilism generally leads to lower rebirth. This is why Christianity, Taoism, Hinduism and other such paths, even though they don't teach the middle way beyond extremes are generally better than completely misunderstanding life and falling into animal or demonic realms.

Being horny is not anti-spiritual... LOL! Neither is being a Bastard, as it's not his fault if he didn't have a father. I think Einstein's main reasons for being as intensely curious as he was, were spiritual in essence. As in... merely trying to fulfill his longing to "know" and "understand" as directly as he knew how; through the dualistic tools of science.

I didn't write that. That was someone else. I re-quoted Einstein when he called Buddhism the religion of the future about 1 year ago or more. That article that ralis or whoever linked was not mine. Thank you very much.