Vajrahridaya

Could be you within Chinese propaganda.

Kind of off topic, but... Along the maturation of the thread I suppose. I think the best societal structure would be a Marxist ideal Communism which would be more of a Communalism. Where everyone shares in the work and profit and we all share in duties. Though of course there will always be those fit to do one thing over another. There will always be those that inspire and they can be the inspiration speaker? One who gets the people energetic enough to keep together and do the work? Which is really what a Guru in any Ashram is supposed to be, is an inspirer, not a dictator. It can be successful, but I don't know if it truly can be on such a large scale as current globalism demands? I don't know? It's worth questioning I think.

Well, according to Buddhism, it never had any true existence to begin with, only illusory premise. It's kind of a pseudonym that we generally keep until we die. Unless we really inquire into the nature of being of course.

Ya see!? I told you...

I'm sure we'll find that we'll agree on more than a few things...

Who cares!? It's the worst in China and abused via China by all other countries. Chinas treatment of Tibet and Falon Gong though a cult, is a horror spectacle! Including possibly 1,000,000 Tibetan deaths since the invasion of Tibet. Supposedly about 1/3rd of the population died. Not to mention the burning of temples and Tibets incredible history of keeping the Indian tantric texts in full, not only Buddhist, but Hindu as well. You will loose this argument. There will be no supporters of the current Communist regime in Tibet and China, which is not really Marxist Communism but Totalitarianism instead.

No, I think we are saying the same thing, just wording it differently. Your wording here is more detail oriented. Uh hu... cheap child labor... yeah!! Just to name one aspect. This has nothing to do with Buddhism and more with the persons.

I agree. I've never been one to follow the pack because of this.

If you do indeed realize that... and are able to take that realization into the day to day circumstances. Then... The Dalai Lama is all about reducing psychological suffering, of which he is quite a pillar. All that he has gone through and still be able to experience the depth of peace and happiness that he does. Is quite amazing! Have you ever seen him do his private chanting and meditation practice? He allowed somebody to have permission to video his private practice. It's very, very powerful. Many years ago, even before I became a Buddhist I saw the video and literally fell off my couch in a spontaneous jhana state. Oh, it's much deeper than that.

Or we are all made of the same flour but baked in different ovens at different altitudes with different barometric pressures? I understand that without direct insight into emptiness it would be hard to understand how to neither accept nor reject, neither be clingy and identifyingly stern or intensely repulsed or completely dismissing. When one is not so attached, one is more apt to flow and the more positive aspects of a personality manifest. How the East defines ego is different from the West. Ego in the East is merely defined by identification with seeming limitations and not seeing the whole in every moment. Where we identify with having been born in this life to this set of parents and these social norms, etc. These things can manifest a personality, but there doesn't have to be a clinging egoism about it. One can still be open and free, fresh and smooth like a new born babies bottom. Actually I think they are a bit wrinkled at first?

I meant the different Buddhist traditions, not all religious traditions. Your talking about Hinduism. Buddhism was a peaceful counter culture uprising of the times. King Ashoka is one king that comes to mind that is a good example of a totalitarian gone good due to the influence of Buddhism in his life. Buddhism and Christianity is very, very different. People are people, but the spiritual tradition of Buddhism is a boat in an entirely different ocean. Unless you want to get into the possibility that Jesus went to North India during the missing 30 years and possibly learned some Buddhism, then brought that wisdom back and explained it through parables?? Who knows?? Or even the possibility that he didn't even exist arises as well. Anyway, you probably saw Zeitgeist? I'm just guessing. Well that movie totally misrepresents Buddhism, as the Buddha was not born of a virgin, etc. but that movie does a good job with the Western religions. It helps to have the conditions of integration so that one can enact that inner silence in the world of noise and seemingly random occurrences. Otherwise it's just a mechanism of escape. That's how it started. If you read lots of the old translations from the early 20th century, you get that kind of Theistic impression about Buddhism, a kind of Christian glaze over. I have a translation of the poems of Milarepa published by Penguin where the term God I think is used here and there, which would be a total mistranslation. I guess it served it's purpose of a slow and less shocking introduction, which is one that is loosing credence. These days, Vajrayana has some pure disseminators who teach the nitty gritty. The Dalai Lama has some books available that go into some of the more detailed aspects of the Dharma. But, Buddhism is different from your examples in that it is a philosophy that without the teaching words doesn't add up to much. Reading the words intently couldn't help but change a mind and lead it to meditation with the right intentions and view points. Unless your a brick wall of course. Qigong and Hatha Yoga are different, in that they are body practices for the mind, but through the avenue of the body, so of course one would need more so to do a lot more doing than reading. Buddhism at it's core is mind to mind and the mind responds to concepts and ideas. It responds to body movements as well, but how to utilize this energy in a day to day fashion needs some integrating concepts, which is why the philosophy of yoga is taught as well as the postures.

I do agree Lin. Peace and Blessings to you as well. I agree Michael. The ancient scriptures have an ancient language and an ancient way of relaying messages through language due to the fact that people farmed and weren't bombarded with so much information back then so there seems to be a slower way of handling things back then. I do mostly recommend something more modern to new people, like the books I recommended earlier in this thread. I have not read "What Makes You Not a Buddhist" written by the guy who did "The Cup" and "Travelers and Magicians." Here's a link... What Makes You Not a Buddhist by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse After reading some of the more modern disseminations of the core elements, one can read the core elements with more clarity and more reference. But, going the other way around might suit others fine as well. It's just that the ancient way of revealing knowledge is too slow for me. Reading the Pali stuff was really helpful for me personally, only after I understood the dharma through more modern sources.

Not at all detrimental, but extremely helpful!

How many? I don't know. I've been reading Buddhism along with all other religions for 20 years now. Enlightenment is defined by the passification of psychological suffering and liberation from unconscious rebirth. Period. That's in every tradition. It's expanded upon in different ways in different traditions. Like I said, in the history of the East, there have been successful Monarchy's. Not perfect, but successful. Including in Nepal and Bhutan. Tibet has had it's share of up's and down's as well. There have also been some Indian Dharma Kings in history that were successful. Oh ok... you do understand then. But yes... there is a lot of neo-tantra going around. It's quite suspect. But, everyone has their process and if their intentions are good, these intentions will bare fruit.

Ok, clearly you don't understand Tantra. Which is why your not a Vajrayana practitioner. This would be an entirely different argument. But, I don't agree with you. Tantra transmutes desire, it doesn't increase desire. Sexuality is a means to enlightenment, just like everything else. A puritanical and negating attitude towards sex, making it taboo is more destructive than it's healthy utilization and integration into the dharmic flow of an individual through training. Highest Yoga Tantra has enlightened many beings. The actual practice is very difficult to pursue and not meant for everyone, as the subjugation of the natural flow of sexual energy into spiritual potency is rather difficult, it being the most powerfully externalizing energy in the body. So to bring it under one's control and internalizing it through the inner alchemy of tantric practice and comprehension is something that is not for everyone. Just as becoming a monk and channeling the energy through sitting meditation is not for everyone. But, a good Tantrika does both. Like you said above, it's not the Dharma that's at fault, but the way individuals use it. All this Neo Tantra going around is just part of many peoples process to get to the higher stuff. Or some people just don't have the capacity and merit to get to the real Tantric practice which has very little to do with sex. There are plenty of Tantric monks who don't have sex at all. There are very few beings who practice any real tantric sex. For the most part, the real practice is a real secret reserved for the most adept practitioners who have the focus and meditative strength to engage in such powerful practices that enlighten one very quickly.

A Monarchy isn't always a bad thing. This has recently been considered a bad thing due to the Western Capitalist and highly flawed system of Democracy where the ignorant are brain washed into who to vote for through popular consumerist culture propaganda feeding stations called Tell-a-lie-vision, that is taking over the world. There have in fact been very just Kings in the history of the East and even recently.

Uh hu... and it has enlightened countless beings. I like this organised religion better than I like disorganized and chaotic thinking plaguing the world. This organized religion has incredible time tested methods and a clear morality that works with the natural psychology of humanity. I'm glad your opinion is merely that and not a fact. Some people just like to see the bad.

I think that's valid. I also guess I got the name wrong, it's not the Akasha mudra it's the Hakini mudra. It still does what it does though.

Wonderful. I was thinking about going into Psychology in school. So, thanks for that recommendation.

Fabulous!! That's two birds with one stone. Or two disciples with one mantra. If Ananda hadn't of made that mistake and hadn't of been listening during all those lectures, he wouldn't have had that Eureka moment and that prostitute would never have met the Buddha too. Lucky hooker!!

Indeed and reading these texts is a practice. I might like to read some Jack Kornfield. I've heard his name mentioned for as long as I can remember.

It's really just subconscious and unconscious impressions coming to the surface. The entire history of being is contained in each and every being and the awakening of "light" of a spiritual dimension opens up these damns that hold together our sense of limitedness. Thus, things like this start happening. Yoga postures and such things actually were inspired by the awakening of this "illumination" of a spiritual nature. I'm sure the same goes for Chi practices and now what was once spontaneously inspired is taught as a system to bring beings back to the source of inspiration within.

In Buddhism, reading the mind changing concepts that work with our human powers of logic and reason IS a practice. Then we meditative to integrate it, and our information gets field tested in the realm of life. Without the conceptual fortitude though that comes from real examination of the scriptures, one will not have the full round of the 8 fold path that includes the very first of the 8 as "right view". So... in Buddhism, it's absolutely imperative to read the texts as that is a form of doing and experiencing in Buddhism. It's like that in Buddhism as well. One should have a genuine guide who has made the teachings a part of his or her physical reality and life breath. Where every action is a reflection of the highest realization. That person teaches without saying anything. But it takes a sensitive student to see that and experience that. In my opinion, reading and practice is both paramount in Buddhism. Not just reading of course, and not just meditation, but both. Of course a real teacher would know exactly what a particular student needs at any particular time. Until then though, one should have a firm grounding in the concepts and practice integrating them in life as reading itself is a meditation and a focusing technique. One see's as the breath calms and the body and mind are honed while reading. Exactly and if our friend LeonBasin who started the thread has the good graces to find such a teacher, then all he or she would need to do would be follow that guidance with open sincerity. Only of course after he has found that this teacher is genuine and of a strong lineage of genuine information. But until that time, he should get a good mind transforming idea through reading. The amount of experiential epiphanies and straight into meditative experiences I've had through reading the texts would have been missed out on if I had of just opted for cushion training, LOL! Indeed, do read the texts! It is a powerful practice.

Everyone has their methods. What I find helps is just letting it be and seeing right through it to emptiness with neither acceptance, nor rejection. Seeing that it has no inherent property, so that it's presence is known, but not allowed presidency. Seeing all interconnectivity annihilates it's mischief which arises merely through identifying with a sense of separation from everyone and everything and thus feeling a subtle and false sense of inherent independence. It's not that one does not have a personality, it's just that one see's right through it and is thus open and flexible. So, one has personality, but not ego.