Vajrahridaya

What I meant to convey here... is that Upekkha obviously has some level of realization.

It's a sideways smiley face. See the equals sign is the eyes and the arrow pointing up is the nose and then the smile. This is one with a hat and a dimple... d=^j

No Buddhist sees it this way because every Buddhist sees all 4 noble truths, not just one of them as a gospel or absolute in and of itself. Also, Buddhism teaches relativity. Only non-Buddhists or people who just want to argue for arguments sake will take one of the noble truths out of context and completely misunderstand it and say it's wrong, therefore Buddhism is wrong. But, these people are just wasting time and showing their suffering/delusion. Don't be one of those people.

I shouldn't right now... I don't think I'm qualified. If it doesn't manifest spontaneously and I have to try really hard to find the right words? Maybe another time I'll be more enlightened and open to channel that information. But it's kind of like projecting an idea or intention that plays in the mud in order to weigh itself down and just snowballs in a well intended way, due to the primal cause of that manifestation being of the highest good... but mud still is mud, the inner intention always shines through and does it's good despite the fact that it's the mud that is holding that intention here. So it's like the Dalai Lamas dukkha is more for the sake of others than it is for the sake of himself. It's that slight bit of dukkha that plays in order to manifest conditions for teaching, but it never really sticks because the core is already illumined and like a furnace. I keep thinking there is a better way to say this, but it escapes me right now.

Like for instance, the Dalai Lama is supposed to be a Bodhisattva projection of a Buddha who manifests as a Bodhisattva through mind projected intention from a pure realm. So the Dalai Lama is both a Bodhisattva and a Buddha at the same time. The higher mind of a Buddha, but the action and display of a high level Bodhisattva in order to have a footing here on Earth and not float away or the body could not even be dense enough to be here. It's deep how they do this... I can try to explain it, and have tried before. But, it seems quite convoluted, especially coming from a person as dense as me. HAHA!

I don't understand where you are applying this? Please restructure my sentences with your correction for me. Thanks!

Just reading this quote I could feel the sense of realization, and translucency. I could feel my I dessolving and dedensefying (made up word) while reading and experiencing the meaning. Very nice share!! Tashi Delegs!!

Actually a Buddha can only project from a pure realm a stream of dharmic intention that may or may not take a human form, through womb birth maybe, or maybe not, depending upon aligning conditions projected by Samsarins in a particular realm of interest. This part gets a little complicated in explanation. But once one has realized Buddhahood, they cannot actually take full rebirth into a realm that is proliferated with dukkha sullied beings. Even though they see that there is no inherent existence to them, the cosmos still has it's laws of physics and metaphysics. May Buddha slap me over the head if I said anything out of turn. =^D For instance a Samyaksambuddha like Shakyamuni comes in when they only have the last vestiges of samsaric karma already destined to be extinguished in one lifetime in a dukkha filled realm like Earth. They already know what they are going to be doing before they take birth, but have enough karma left of dukkha to go through the motions and be living examples of the path for the rest of us dense beings. Also a Buddha like this only take birth if there are lots of seekers of the truth but not any really good teachers of it. If me and you are to be Buddhas, we are Sravakabuddhas' and we may become Samyaksambuddhas in another universe or far away galaxy as well as project here too... anyway... it's complicated in description, though easy to understand within the knowledge of emptiness. Xabir... I say this more in general, because you might already know these little things.

Yes, as it's not about experiences per say, though experiences do happen on the path of life and on the path of meditation, but it's really about how you inwardly interpret the experience which liberates or binds. Eventually, your pure view and experience will be a cohesive unit and a sturdy platform which thought and action will emanate from. But, view is very important in Buddhism, even more important than meditation. But, meditation and vipassana as well as other practices which are all basically modifications of these two or integrations into other forms of these two, are very important as well. "Right View" which is the first of the 8 fold noble path will feed your meditation and vipassana. But one must make sure the view is always refined and not just go off into bliss realms through the meditative absorptions. =^) hehe... which are very fun and can be quite dramatically blissful... very easy to be distracted by such phenomena that transcend the 5 senses.

It is in fact the common interpretation of the Vajrayana type Buddhist, as well as Mahayana in general. I've never been limited to the Theravada interpretation, but even the Buddha speaks of Nirvana as being the joy beyond all joys. I'm quite sure that you are not aware of how sophisticated even the Theravada is. Which is not an insult, but rather just that you haven't taken the time to read the texts as they are, or the commentaries by evolved practitioners of the paths. Ok, there are a lot of assumptions happening here. I said "unconscious re-birth", or re-birth without awareness and without control is not good or bad, it's just not what a seeker of freedom from "dukkha" would consider optimal. An enlightened being can control their own rebirth and only take birth in a body of being that can practice and express the Dharma and be influenced by evolved practitioners of the dharma. Of course what I said rings true to orthodox Buddhism. The Buddha taught the doctrine of relativity and non-abiding nature of things. So of course he taught that life is not inherently suffering. Thus there are the next 3 noble truths which reveal the relativity of the first noble truth. He also taught in his very first statement to Lord Brahma that mind and phenomena is inherently pure and uncompounded since beginningless time. So of course life is not inherently suffering and this is never taught in orthodoxy. More that suffering is the destiny of all beings who do not understand life. Thus... dukkha is relative and not absolute. It makes an awesome back bone. Because it includes the 8 fold noble path as well as all that the 8 fold noble path leads to. I think you need a good schooling in what the 4 noble truths mean. Not what you think it means, but what the truths actually mean in elaboration. There are many, many great teachings on the meaning of the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold noble path which is the most beautiful and systematic backbone, like perfectly aligned vertebrae for a beautiful and vast spiritual path and personal psychology. First of all, to clarify. In Buddhist cosmology, the Gods that teach that they are the soul creators of the universe, of which there are many who teach that they are the one and only... are considered highly powerful, in quantum leaps from the human capacity, but also highly deluded. There is no substratum, or prime mover to the universe. Buddhas teachings are fully Atheist. He said so, and was not just silent on the matter, he was only silent for one instance, but also spoke volumes about this in other instances. There is no God... according to Buddhist philosophy and practice. There are deeply powerful and compassionate beings and some do think they are God due to a deep state of absorption that they identify with, and many of them have started religions here on Earth. There are also very powerful and greedy Gods who have started religions... Buddhism has nothing to do with these paths for the most part. Buddhism doesn't deny pleasurable experiences and in Tantra, we actually like to explore them but also see right through them. Now, if your goal in life is to have more and more pleasurable experiences before death, then your goal is different from that of a Buddhist. Of course as a Buddhist, I go for both, the Buddhist wisdom and the best this world has to offer at the same time. This is why I'm a Vajrayana and Dzogchen practitioner. You have to understand that there are many branches of Buddhism, and at their core, they agree about the relativity of the 1st noble truth, but at the same time, that this relativity will not end even after you extinguish it within yourself, suffering that is, you will still see how others suffer and collect ways to help others free themselves from the first noble truth as well. Even though that noble truth is extinguished in the 3rd noble truth, through the 4th within a Buddha, they still see that for others, the 1st noble truth still sings on. Also, what you're saying about just going a long and enjoying life without knowledge of your future, of how you will die and what realm you will be born into, is considered a form of "dukkha" or unsatisfactoriness to a seeker of the truth. If you are satisfied with just collecting pleasurable experiences, then you don't qualify to be a Buddhist as of yet. Buddhism is not for the suffering and embittered people, it's for those that want to see past the dualities, including the duality of pain and pleasure. It's for those that want to know, directly and experientially the nature of all things and life in the awareness of the truth always. Not for those that want to play in the waves but not go down into the depths of the ocean. Even though, in certain forms of Buddhism, one can do both. You don't have to be a monk to attain liberation. Sometimes a monk even has to stop being a monk to go deeper into the heart of the Buddha. It's not nihilistic at all! Also... through meditation you have direct experiences of your past lives. As I have seen directly many of my past lives, my faith is based on experience, not blind clinging to doctrine. As the Buddha said himself to not merely believe what he says because he said it, but to explore it and realize it for yourself... directly! Through the practice of meditation and contemplation, there is no other way life can be seen to be the way it is, except through understanding that re-birth is a genuine and experientially true fact of life. How is this Nihilistic? There is no way! Nihilism is actually classified in Buddhism as the idea that what you do will have no consequences and that when you die, that's the end of your mind stream. Buddhism considers that Nihilism. So if you think you only have one life to live? Then I as a Buddhist would call you a Nihilist. A pleasure seeking, materialist, nihilist. A materialist in Buddhism is one who thinks they are nothing more than the physical body and the vision through the 5 senses are the whole truth, thus people like this just want to satisfy their senses only and not look deeper, and are nihilist because they think that their mind will die with their body and brain. Not that you would be considered a bad person, but rather that you are not a seeker of the truth of things and are satisfied with the answers your 5 senses feed you. This isn't a problem if you wish to be this way, and I'm happy to agree to disagree. But, don't think for once that you understand the meaning of the Buddhas teaching of the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold noble path if you haven't embraced it and practiced it deeply. By the way... The 3rd Noble truth, which is Nirvana is defined as unsurpassed joy as free from all conditions, even itself. So you should tell your friend this, that Joy is an integral part of the 4 noble truths and is actually a deeper part then the part about suffering. The cessation of suffering is naturally imperturbable bliss! That kind that is far beyond any sense pleasure, or even the various bliss' of meditative absorptions. So, as you can see, you have yet to understand what Orthodox Buddhism teaches. When you see a Theravadin monk looking quite calm and straight faced... you have no idea the ocean of bliss that is open within past the view of your senses which identify joy with smiling and laughter. These are outer conditions. There is a deeper joy to be found past this through the 8 fold noble path. I guess you can say that it is a condition, but this condition is a condition free of conditions. Anyway... There is more to a book than it's cover. Every Buddhist from the Pali type to the Sanskrit, to the Tibetan experience deeply profound bliss by following the path and all of them decrease their inner condition for suffering. Every single one of us. Even if you can't see it from the outside, inside, it's happening. Thanks for the blessing!! =^)

Yes, ok... I can agree here. =^) Up to this point and beyond, the Buddha does everything better than me, including teaching Buddhism... HA!

Yeah... one of the worst translations of the Bhagavad Gita on the planet has to be A.C. Bhaktivedantas' of the Hare Krishnas. Sadly, it's one of the most widely read version on the planet too... HA! Wow...

It's more like he/she has free awareness, but the way s/he manifests is still conditioned by Samsarins. LOL! Yes, just another part of the play, but liberated in and through it.

I'm glad to see that you're still here! =^)

Yeah, Tichy's the bomb! Love that guy!! I've read lots of his stuff.

Indeed... the Buddha doesn't deny that the flow is "E" ternal... =^D he just denies that it is all one homogeneous eternally static thing... like an Atman or Brahman. All phenomena and minds do have one homogeneous truth, that is it's all equally empty, but emptiness is also empty... thus emptiness is not a thing, but rather a quality that all things and non-things share.

It's really about teaching the ego to be free from itself even while it is the dancer in the play. When you are free from your ego, or rather your ego is free from itself, then you learn more, you enjoy more, your psychological suffering decreases even when your body is in pain. The experience of pain entirely transforms actually. Anyway... don't kill the ego, just teach it another way of looking in the mirror.

It's true that even a Buddhas actions are bound by the accumulations that is the flipping of his/her beginningless Samsaric experience into the endless Nirvanic experience of the very same constant cycling of universes. But the awareness that is the mind of a Buddha transcends the display that is the being or person which manifests in congruency to the needs of countless beings.

Rofl! Yup! As endless as the inventions of new languages.

The goal is simply the complete removal of psychological suffering and unconscious rebirth. How this manifests from Buddha to Buddha is entirely unique. Liberation in Buddhism originates dependent upon the constant awareness of the empty nature of mind and phenomena to the point of never falling into un-awareness again. One can at this point then manifest into various realms without loosing one's core realization deep within and be a guide for other beings, to live eternally in service throughout many comings and goings of universal displays. In Buddhism, Nirvana or liberation is not becoming one with anything, it's just the constant experiential understanding and awareness of how things work, always and forever on the most fundamental basis of things. The accumulation of knowledge about the particulars of various things, like how to make a watch or cook pancakes is part of the wonder of life which a Buddha also experiences. But if that watch doesn't tick right or the pancakes come out flat, a Buddhas inner state of mind is unperturbed by such things. =^) A Buddha fully participates in the wonders of life, but is never wavered from the constant contemplation of the true nature of all things. So yes, there is awareness in Nirvana, but it's an individual realization, not an all subsuming consciousness that one merges into.

Maybe you assume assumptions? ;^)

I agree with you. Vajrayana as practiced in Tibet is very much in line with how it was practiced in India. The understanding is the same, the realization, the fruit or goal of the path has not changed one bit. Only some of it's dressings have changed dramatically in some cases, but not at it's core.

This has to be understood in context. The fact is that all phenomena, though they appear, are inherently empty, always and eternally. To realize this, is to realize beyond birth and death, beyond time... etc. It's not an actual thing he is describing, but an understanding that persists eternally if you realize the true meaning of his teaching on an experiential level.