Vajrahridaya

Of course! That person went straight to a Satyaloka. Pure land, in English/Buddhist parlance. Well, you can only please some of them some of the time and all of them none of the time. I'd like to say... from Swami Muktananda... Which is funny considering what most people think about him due to rumors and projection. "A true disciple can gain liberation from a false Guru who speaks true words." Obviously giving the power to the disciple to attain liberation for them self. As the Buddha said, "Be a lamp unto yourself."

Study some Mahayana and maybe check out... Myriad Worlds... book 1 of the Treasury of Knowledge. which is a vast and complete treasury of all Buddhist methodology, perspective and cosmology. You'd be surprised at how quantum physicist it is. Take care!

Oh... I've said this plenty of times over the period that I've been here. But people have been so caught up in the fact that I've said... Buddhist, that they haven't really seen the truth of what I've been saying. I'm just saying that as a religion goes... Buddhism is the closest expression. IMHO. Having seen much in quantum leap time frames. But... I do agree... it's actually merely about being completely and totally honest with oneself... that one transcends the self, or Self, in Hindu parlance. I'm just saying... if you have attained Buddhahood then you are not in disagreement with what Buddhism suggests through the literature of great and enlightened history of beings and the different turnings of the wheel from Hinayana, to Mahayana, to Vajrayana to Dzogchen. As Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche said... If you realize the essence of Buddhism, it's no problem if you practice whatever religion, as long as you keep the view of emptiness and D.O. Which means transcending self, or Self of any kind. So... as far as expression goes, that means re-interpreting all major religious dogmas on an internal and personal level. This is deeper than the words spoken. Take care.

This is a very good understanding... but, it has implications within the particulars of eminating without suffering for endless beings... Much like the Dalai Lama reflects, amongst other venerated Rinpoches, not all, but plenty. I don't know... I didn't really see how deep he was until I recieved transmission from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche... saw the 6 realms and 31 planes DIRECTLY... without a blemish of a doubt... saw directly... and then... after thus. I was able to see the Dalai Lamas energy beyond his expression which he has to co-agulate with so many projective beings as a political leader. Though.. as a young Hindu... I did see his deep state and fell off my couch in uncontrollable bliss and rapture, please understand this was a time of total renunciation of all popular cultural activities and lots of meditation, study, yoga and virtue practice. I saw him doing his practice as recorded and I saw right into the state of his being Avalokateshwara in human form without even having read about such things yet. Seriously man. Then later I saw directly that I had been a Tibetan Buddhist monk directly beyond a doubt, so all this information came very quickly over the period of a very few years. Picking up Buddhism is like picking up an old well read book for me. Oh how blissful it is!!!

Oh thanks... I just got this new 23 inch Samsung LED Monitor... and everything shrunk and my eye sight is horrrrrible. I broke my last pair of glasses... probably shoulda spent the money on glasses... AH!! Thank you... Not by name... but by virtue of seeing directly the entire realization that is dependent origination and emptiness, thereby seeing... what is recorded in the Pali Suttas... so many past lives... seeing through things... various aspects of perception which go along with actually... I mean really seeing the holographic universe as holographic. Also going into the Mahayana which talks about activating infinite compassion for infinite beings and realizing how to project infinite incarnations into infinite universes throughout infinite time... Things you might consider an acid trip... but I've taken acid many times... I'm talking about the best stuff... as I used to deal on Haight st. Rainbow Family stuff. An acid trip is noooooothing compared to a genuine Buddharific realization of direct experiencing and seeing... a quantum leap from a minuscule acid trip. Which I can eat like candy at this point and just see right through without a flinch or a wink as it's merely effecting body chemicals and mind realization is much, much subtler than brain chemical activity. Contrary to your belief system. Thanks dude... I feel it from you... really... I do. Thanks... watery eyed I am right now.

You should read his biography. I did. It's a good read. Each Buddha manifests it differently, but it is most definitely always in line with the Buddha lineage, which is diverse in expression though one has most definitely taken refuge in the Buddha lineage, dharma and sangha. They understand the immense role the Buddha played as a "wheel turning Buddha" and the first turner in our age and doesn't just make up his own teachings. This doesn't have to be a physical thing, but an internal thing. This does not dismiss individual creativity either... You should get more familiar with the Buddhist teachings through Buddhist realizers. I'm not into these anti-traditionalists like Krishnamurti who think they know better than a million Buddhas. When people read their teachings first before reading the teachings of Buddhas, they get confused easily. I am into traditions that work. Not self made teachings of... "Oh... I know better"... That's just me though. Fair enough, but I'm not here to succumb to projections of negativity. I can only reach a few out of endless beings at this particular time. So be it. Of course I'll continue to refine my expression and evolve. Of course I'll wish to activate in a way that's more and more inline with the Bodhisattva ideal as I progress... of course. Forgive me for my trespasses as I forgive those that trespass against me.

Wishing others liberation from erroneous views has nothing to do with ego, unless it does. In my case... hey... I don't know yet... I'm not yet a Buddha. So maybe a little bit underneath the lack of egoic feeling there is a secret ego in there... which I don't doubt. But... I'm still on the path and haven't graduated to full blown Buddhahood as of yet. So, forgive me. Anyway... this argument occurred naturally through a progression of me saying... "according to Buddhism... blah, blah, blah"... then... uh oh!! Backlash!! ARRRRRRGGH!!! Hahahah!! People projecting ego should be more aware of their own ego. If no engagement happens, there are no arguments as it takes two to tangle. Yeah? Yes, it would take going into the formless Jhanas/Samadhis directly. Which is why a Buddha can see someone else's past lives before they have acquired the awareness to themselves. Something you don't believe in due to a projection of delusion based upon... I just won't go into it.

They are if you can see into the formless realm, which is basically your own unconscious mind and the interconnection with other unconscious minds.

I've said this so many times marble. Here... I'll quote another piece in this thread where I said this with more clarity... Post 42 if you would.

You certainly have misunderstood me here. But yes... in a way, it's true. It is the first step, to realize Nirvana, and that's only the beginning. Mahayana goes further than the first turning of the wheel and talks about how to realize the full display of Buddhahood in order to help endless beings, endlessly. As... now... you have endless time out of suffering to manifest through... so... now... it's like... how do I manifest most beneficially even while others are projecting their very powerful limitations? So now... Samsara is experienced as Nirvana, but there are still those that experience it as Samsara... so it get's quite subtle here. How to really manifest Buddhahood and transcend merely being an Arahant. That's why Krishnamurti's teachings are incomplete.

I agree... As consciousness arises dependent upon various causes and conditions, so awareness does as well and is the cause of liberation or bondage, is not a supreme substance... but is the supreme gate for an individual. So is considered the supreme source of liberation or bondage according to Buddhism.

No... that's not the same at all. Right it is all things... same difference... we scrutinize this. It's not D.O. Karma refers to cause and effect. D.O. is how it all works and is the perspective that reveals the quality of emptiness, as in, non-inherency of all phenomena and mind, showing no absolute existence. There is something very subtle here you are not getting on a logical level. I probably won't be the one to teach it to you. As you consider me delusional. So... I will bounce off of that filter. It has something more than just terminology. I'm not that stupid contrary to your belief. Whatever... we dismiss this is mis-cognition and don't consider it the Truth. Don't blame me for your subjective interpretation of things. It has nothing to do with formal education but contemplation, meditation, and right view. Which one generally needs an education in. You are talking about Buddhas, which are very, very, very rare. Like I said... I am no Buddha, but you would be surprised as to what a Buddha can do transcending your projected limitations based upon the limited level of your remembered experience. Don't you see how you limit everyone and everything subjectively? Don't you see how you have this idea about what is real, and you make it concrete? Don't you see how limiting in bondage this is? It's like you've lived in a cage all your life and you cannot consider anything outside of this cage because it's the limits of your thus far remembered experience. Yup, we can, not even Buddhas, but just Buddhists with some practice under their belt can do and see more than what you consider... "normal". You think you are human... scientists don't even really know what a human is yet. So... how are you so sure of your limitations? Because you've been conditioned to believe and experience a certain way does not mean it's the Truth. Not much of that coming from you tonight.

Of course, the Guru teaches, method and wisdom but it's up to you to realize it for yourself. Not in a certain sense, but focus on an enlightened being has a tendency to make you enlightened. It's amazing how the mind becomes like that which it focuses upon. A neat trick. You think you are bowing and offering to a Guru, when it's really your own enlightened nature and when you get that, you get it big time!! Very nice. Nothing wrong with worshiping the teaching in the right context in a non-dualistic way. I worship all beings... why not! Everyone is worthy of veneration, and it is especially beneficial if it's directed towards one who has realized the highest human potential. You go ahead and see the negatives of it, I will see the positives and benefit. It's better than worshiping your own limitations thinking... "ow... I'm only human... boo hoo." It's like that with a Guru too, but you get further faster because someone that knows the territory can be a better guide than one's own ignorance of the territory. A True Guru should know when you are taking this worship thing too far and getting caught up in a seeming duality and will indeed send you away for a while to contemplate self reliance. The last thing a real Guru wants is dependency. Like I said, omniscient about how all things work and how things flow. Coupled with the power to see spontaneously any amount of information that will benefit a being, including reading thoughts, past lives, seeing through matter, long distance viewing. The Buddha said in the Pali Suttas that omniscience in the Buddha context does not mean knowing all particular things simultaneously. Just having the power to see through everything to the heart of the matter, no matter what. A Buddha has the meditative power to go into a space of infinite knowing though and pull out from the 3 times some tid bit of information that is beneficial. But, even the Buddha said he was ambiguous about a time way far into the future from his time on Earth. He said... it's up in the air, not engraved in stone basically about the fall of Buddhism. This new age view of all paths lead to the same goal is an idea that would bring about the fall of Buddhism, because it assumes a single source of all being, which Buddhism does not. So, here I am... helping a bit to preserve. Whatever I can do without falling sway to the inner enemies. Well.. it's obvious you haven't studied much Buddhism, only bits here and there. Because the Buddha did say what it means to be omniscient, as in... know how "Everything" works in the grand scheme of things. With the power to go into a state of self transcendence and be an oracle of sorts. Believe it or not... this is indeed part of Buddhism since the very beginning. Buddhas are not bound by your thus far experienced limitations. Which I consider... quite a stupid notion to hold onto. But that's just because I've experienced some transcendence of such limitations here and there through my practice. Eh... I don't think you have really experienced that too deeply. Otherwise you would have some experience of self limitation transcendence. You're just trying to put me in your box. I won't fit. Uh hu... you have your own path of process of progress. Take care.

I haven't ignored them, I just find them incomplete. That is merely one aspect, the core aspect that all other displays of Buddhahood manifest from. The tenets of the Pali Tradition are very simple compared to Mahayana. Of which is my tradition. So, according to well even in the Pali it say's that if you've truly attained Buddhahood, it is also coupled by x,y, and z powers of perception and conduct. Period. Read up on it... it's in there. You no longer are a normal human being because the conditions surrounding being a human being have reached cessation. The Buddha say's this almost verbatim. Are you a god? No said the Buddha, because the conditions surrounding such activity have reached cessation. Then are you a... this... or, that... on and on... including human. Well... this is where I see a mistake, because he obviously doesn't understand the real Guru, disciple relationship which is deeply profound and it's really about the connection to a liberated matrix of beings. This helps far more than anything Krishnamurti or any Buddha has ever said, is the real... and tangible inner connection to the liberated lineage of endless Buddhas, which one is destined to become one of through this connection... most definitely. Because you haven't experienced this... you have no idea how profound this is. It's something worth putting your desire in... as it would be right use of ignorance. No true Guru is like this... a true Guru teaches you how to become the Guru yourself. Period, not a slave. The Buddha said this too. Also there's a criteria for finding a Guru which is recommended a 9 year search or something. How many disciples have attained anything? Who made this Guru a Guru... thus lineage. Does this Guru's word accord with the teachings of known Guru's, scriptures, and other such enlightened beings? Can this Guru give mind to mind transmission of the actual state of Buddhahood? Basically, how well can this Guru reflect the state of wisdom and method? You can go ahead and see the negative in this... I'll see the positives and benefit. If you have a real karmic connection with the Guru, this Guru knows you more than you know yourself and you experience this in a very tangible, blissful and wise way. Again... something outside of your particular range of personal experience. So... not worth assuming about I would say. It's better if you stay agnostic about such things and follow your path of finding out what exactly that is.

It's nice to see an interesting contribution from Tao99 after one of my posts. But, I have heard of this search... yes indeed. The thing is, physics is sometimes found to be subjective because the god particle is indeed one's own consciousness, but that's just the god of our own manifesting, co-arisen in each moment inter-connected with all other individual mind streams, so not really a god substance per say, but the most malleable substance for sure. An illusive beast consciousness is.... No problem with the rambling as this is where it's done. See, this is the crux of Buddhist departure from all other mystical traditions. Mystical in the sense of diving into the mystery to find out what it's really about, not in the sense of giving into a mystical substance. Anyway... Buddhists from the Buddha on do not consider this "I AM" as a source, it is merely a stage in meditative awareness mis-interpreted as a source because coming out of this meditation, one see's one's own light of consciousness first, then manifest reality, mis-considering what's happening, thinking the light of consciousness as the source of all being and the one behind everything. So... see... this is what I'm saying, Buddhists don't agree with your and most spiritual traditions idea here. We consider this a mis-cognition or a mis-interpretation of meditative and contemplative experience. Buddhist D.O./emptiness paradigm goes much subtler... according to Buddhists. That's why we think that your view is a conditioned view. A view that is still craving some sort of ultimate existence. Even if it's seen as beyond concept, it's really just a one big concept that's considered infinite and shines from it's own side as the "source" of all things. Buddha criticizes this very clearly in the Pali suttas, thus no Buddhist of any type agrees with this assumption of, "oneness", which is merely a meditative absorption experience, mis-understood. Take care!

I only know him through people that have studied his teachings. I have never done so. Everyone that is influenced by him seem to not have this understanding and go... "No Guru", "No Path" as some absolute savior concepts. Also I was unimpressed with him when he spoke to Trungpa Rinpoche. He talked over him all the time, seemed impatient and bouncy like an adolescent. Seemed more enframed by his keen intellect and clever retorts than anything else. Well, they may be saying that one has not eradicated the cause of suffering completely even when one is enjoying life and not experiencing conscious suffering, there is still the potential to suffer if one is not omniscient completely about one's own condition on all levels. Basically, until one is a Buddha, one still has some shedding to do, that's all. But... it sounds like your friends hold it up as a holy grail. It's a view, but it shouldn't hamper enjoyment and natural acceptance of the constant current of now... It's really meant as a way to not get complacent when things appear comfortable because the law of impermanence is still at hand. Because comfort zones are just conditioned joys, not the truly uncompounded bliss of liberation, or the one taste of true clarity while in motion. Cool... have a good one! Yes, ok... the non-point of time is looked into and seen transparently by Buddhist clarity, that's all I'm saying. It's not considered a period of one, just a period of suppressed potential of endless beings and things left over from the previous universe.

First of all we don't believe in a source so our practices have a different cause and a different result. We also have a different interpretation of non-duality. Your's is, all things are one, for us, it's all things have no inherent nature, but are still many, just all equally empty of substratum. Or to put it another, there is no Eternal nature that is real and true, there is only impermanence, nothing inherent that is permanent. I don't cling to what you consider is clinging, I just use what's beneficial, that's all. Our premise is the first words of the Buddha after he attained enlightenment, "mind and it's phenomena are uncompounded, free, and naturally liberated since beginningless time." Not really a confining premise unless one doesn't understand what this means experientially and even philosophically.

One can experience this in a state of meditative absorption. The experience is not considered a revelation of an absolute truth though, only a relative one and a mistaken cognition if one considers it a revelation of a single all pervasive being beyond concept that all things are.

I don't understand these kinds of Buddhists. The 1st noble truth is relative, not absolute. Life is only suffering if ones consciousness is afflicted. A non-afflicted consciousness does not experience suffering, ever.

Actually, like I said before. D.O. also refers to emptiness, so it's subtler than merely cause and effect. As it refers to emptiness it is revealing that there is no single substance that all things are, such as everything is "The Tao". So, D.O. of Buddhism is pointing to an understanding quite subtler than merely cause and effect. Everything is Tao, no? The singularity before the big bang? It's true that Buddhism doesn't make any excuses for ignorance. We do indeed feel that we can know how everything works. Not know every particular thing of the countless manifestations, but how it all works we can know exactly. That's why a Buddha is considered omniscient with powers of perception to see remotely, see through physical objects... go into meditation and see things in the distant past or future, into other dimensions of reality... etc. As far as how this subject happened? It happened through a natural progression originating dependently.

Buddhists don't believe this. That's just this physical universe first of all, of which both in the Vedas and in Buddhism name all different levels of big bangs in different realms of longer and longer lasting universes of more or less refinement in energy forms. Also... beings who were to be manifest from the potential of the last physical universe into this physical universe actually existed in a formless potential as this so called, "singularity"... called the "pralaya" in Sanskrit. But, to think that it's all one thing in an unmanifest formlessness is what Buddhists consider the crux of ignorance, thinking everything is one grand non-thing is considered a mis-interpretation of information. All the beings existing as an unmanifest formless but merely in a repressed state still do exist in potential in an unconscious form, due to their clinging left over from the last universe. It's quite complicated. But basically think of your deep dreamless sleep... that's basically the state of being all these beings are in, unconscious. When the conditions ripen, the potential to remanifest the physicality arises, so do the elements start to evolve propelled by the latent karmas of the beings from the last physical universe also incorporated with beings of higher realms offering conscious and unconscious thoughts into the equation. Then the unconscious consciousness' of so many beings start to manifest through bodies of elements that can hold consciousness in very simple forms. Many, many beings are already awake in higher realms, there are so many realms, and in refined form realms and only drop down into this realm when there are evolved forms of elements that can hold consciousness, like Mammals. Some drop down to this realm consciously out of compassion for us, others unconsciously due to karmic necessity. Some beings can mind project into a defined physical element form such as ours and still be conscious in the higher refined not so densely defined form realm. Buddhist cosmology is all very, very complicated. For us the now is all 3 times, past present and future and all is ungraspable, like a hologram. There are different ways to liberation, some through renunciation which is considered a slower path than the Tantric path of transformation, which is slower than the Dzogchen path of instantaneous recognition of the natural liberation of all phenomena and consciousness where one neither rejects nor grasps at the manifest and is... wu wei as you like to say. But, to be a Dzogchen practitioner, it's generally considered that one go through all the different stages of practice, renunciation to re-evaluate one's role and experience of reality, then engaging transformation of Tantra when one has accumulated one's energies and understanding through renunciation, then to spontaneous liberation of the Dzogchen path. I meant attached as in we are all connected, not psychologically.

That's still monism and not dependent origination according to Buddhism. So, it's not the same realization and does not lead to Buddhahood. In Buddhism, everything is not one thing. That's considered a mistaken cognition, or mistaken interpretation of intuitive experience, which again is a conditioned phenomena. So, we of course are not in agreement that the Taoists went any deeper. In fact, we consider Taoism for the most part as being stuck at the formless level realization. Until proven otherwise. It most likely depends on the individual person. But as a whole, the teaching you and Stig and other Taoists tend to be elaborating upon is still scrutinized by the Buddha as still a Samsaric view, though a high level one. Buddhism is not so idealistic as everything is how it's supposed to be. Everything is thus, but malleable through recognition of emptiness. Interesting how I can tell a Krishnamurti follower. A guy that say's, don't have teachers, but was a teacher. All his students say, "Don't have Guru's"... but cling to Krishnamurti more than students of genuine lineage masters do. The view is not necessarily the experience if it's merely conceptual. Also... since Krishnamurti denied the relative and process of progress. His view was only half right. Swami Muktananda said once that, "Contentment is the destroyer of ego." Very true. I did mention it though... I mentioned tears of compassion. Anyway... I agree with you here. People take the 1st noble truth way to absolutely. It's relative.

That's only one of it's manifestations. When I first started practicing kundalini, I was celibate entirely, not even during dream time. Then when it gets centered in the upper chakras, one can enjoy sex again and not loose energy. Like most guys go to sleep, most guys loose their energy, but once the flow is going upwards naturally and not downwards like for most people, then the energy is not lost during ejaculation and one is also receiving from the women her energy and it's cycling. I think you've talked about this. But once it's centered in the upwards flow, kundalini is not merely sublimated sexual energy anymore, it's something much more refined and wise.

The actual experience of Buddhahood, which he did not have. He was merely an intellectual, and was enthusiastic about his power of intellect. That's about it. Another thing... Those that don't understand that the craving for Buddhahood for a Samsarin is the best use of that energy don't understand tantra. Because it means developing the virtues, the jhanas, the understanding, then intuitive insight of D.O/Emptiness. It means putting forth the effort to study and find out exactly what Buddhahood is really about, not found in Krishnamurti talks... seek out beings who have actually realized something beyond intellectual meanderings. Like a bee that only goes after the flowers that have their roots enmeshed in the matrix of endless realization. Yet, still keep the view that transcends all this, but the view is not necessarily the experience. Where Krishnamurti went horribly wrong. I'll put it to you bluntly. You and so many here who argue for no apparent reason except to satisfy their egos need some of that golden B.S. Because the path is not made of intellectual excuses, uh hrm... Krishnamurti... and is made for those that actually put forth the trouble to walk it. That is true... That does not excuse him for all his mistakes though... both philosophical, and actual. Not that I overly judge the guy, I'm just discerning about him. But, I have these powers and I'm far from Buddhahood... well... that's relative... what's far, right? But really...