Vajrahridaya

He was supposedly influenced by the Bhagavad Gita if I'm not mistaken? Ah... but I don't think I can rid the people who are making the misunderstandings of their understandings. Just the people who are reading on the sidelines are reading and learning. So really, I'm not talking to the people who I seem to be talking to. Besides, if you look for a second objectively... I hardly post in any topics other than the ones where Buddhism comes up. That's it. Your quite the black and white thinker aren't you. Been looking at yin/yang symbols for too long. It all originates dependently.. upon an endless chain of causes and conditions. This moment is predicated upon an endless array of interdependent causes and conditions add infinitum. Just think about that... on a molecular level, on a familial history level, your parents being based on parents, etc. Your computer being based on materials and workers, who are also based on parents, components that are based on more components. The seemingness of your typing is based not on itself, but on an endless chain of causes and conditions that have absolutely no point of origin, just endless regress. If you can think about that really... you'll be coming close to what Xabir meant in his poem that he quoted. If you can see that what you are calling real is an activity based upon so many causes and conditions in so many directions that have no beginning and that each component is itself without individual existence other than caused by other infinite chains of conditioning, you'll begin to understand what dependent origination means.

LOL! That doesn't hold up to scrutiny either as the ocean is made of individual particles and does not inherently exist either... No glass, no ocean, just infinite relativity. Yes... his particular way of expressing the absolute truth of Buddhism was subjective. Yet, his insight into the nature of things was objective because he transcended his subjectivity by realizing directly infinite relativity. So, he was able to be objective about the different places that people were at internally and teach according to their needs, thus he taught in different ways according to different capacities. If you see dependent origination, your able to see right through both object and subject, including yourself as a subject. You would need some meditative experience past the 4th Jhana to understand this directly. Both Buddhist and Hindu cosmology work along that same theory. There is no first expansion/contraction. It's been going on since beginningless time... expansion, sustainment, contraction. This is deified in Hinduism through the "Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva" trinity. Buddhists though escape this endless round of universal expansion/sustaining/contraction. That most people are doomed to repeat over and over again. During the contraction, people who believe in this one spirit will merge into that one spirit, but during the next expansion, will come out ignorant of the end of the previous universe which the beginning of this one is based on. I've said this many times before in this room. What people call natural is actually just habit energy since beginningless time. Buddhists get beyond this habit energy conditioning, which is why Buddhism is not really a Religion when one see's it for what it really is, beyond it's religious aspects. It's merely a way of seeing the universe so that one can transcend it fully and totally, while remaining seemingly a part of it in full enjoyment. This is why we don't reify a universal oneness or substratum, unlike every single other religion on the planet. We, unlike everyone else, don't jump into the boiling pot at the end of the universe, saying yay! Let's all be as "one"... We see infinite connectivity, but we see all reifications as originating dependent upon attachment so even a universal Tao falls under this scrutiny.

It's kind of like the ability to get yourself out of a bad acid trip. You have to convince your mind that it's all just an inherently empty display that holds no power outside of what you grant it. You really have to have faith in this wisdom for it to hold enough weight to dis-function the negative effecting. P.S. Also remember that this infinite matrix of dependently originated relativity has produced endless beings, or endless mind streams that have been through anything that you've been through at least in essence, though not particularily, but in meaning and cause, yes... that have gone through it and ended up complete Buddhas on the other side! So, you can call on these beings and understand that their potential realized, is the same potential that you have, even if not fully realized, so... connect to that...

That's a subjective interpretation that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. But of course, there is a reason why Buddhists are Buddhists and Taoists are not. It has to do with capacity. Eh... let it flow... let it flow...

I don't care about the article really. I'm talking about Buddhist realization and experience. There is as mentioned in the article a practice of the Tibetans to take on the suffering of others on a physical level in order to help, but their psychology experiences this suffering as a bliss simultaneous with the seeming burning.

The mystic experience of God is basically just a reification of connecting to the infinite connectivity of all phenomena, thereby self transcending and experiencing a kind of vast order to the seeming chaos which is really just interdependent relativity within an infinite spectrum. When we have strong held identities, that experience can conjure up all sorts of way's to reify that identity, especially when touching such an endless resource of information, as each point leads to all other points simultaneously thus the mind can create an identity that encapsulates even that experience as a kind of cosmic identity. But this too is a delusion... just a really big, big one, that most religions are based on.

Manifestations of cause and effect. Gopi was just experiencing the onslaught of his positive and negative karma coming into conjunction due to the fact that he did do lot's of selfless actions in previous lives, and his awareness was just illuminating this closet of karmas, or historical conjunction in the form of their effects through meditation, thus the onslaught of powerful energy like waves coming from beyond locations of time and place, but he had a strong sense of "I" as well. He identified this experience of all interconnectivity as a being of intelligence, only because of his strong experience of identity, which is also why experienced lot's of fear. I know that fear very well and have had to talk to it consciously over years in order to go deeper as each night during lucid dreaming and also in deep meditation I'd come across this fear of going further down the rabbit hole you could say. I would come out and be mad at myself..."why'd you let your fear get to you!", but I tell you that level of fear is so deep and primal, it's way deeper than the mere fear of dying in this lifetime... it's a very subtle and powerful fear, that veil between I of reference, even of infinite reference, to, non-reference of infinite potentiality that just see's the all flow without beginning and without identity. It's impossible to put into words that "everyone would get", but... hey... I always like to try. I guess you've never experienced yourself disembodied and you I suppose cater to the idea that out of body experiences are merely brain made, instead of seeing that brain function as being intertwined with realms beyond the 5 sense designation?

Yes, yes... rest your case... that heavy suitcase is a good thing to rest... put it down. All that subjective viewing causing you blurry vision. Let it go like an empty and lost suitcase once used for traveling to bitter projections and long held habit patterns. Oh no, no... that's not seeing with wisdom at all. You see, if you really look at yourself objectively, you'll see that the only buttons that get pushed are the ones that exist. You see? P.S. I remember a wisdom... never blame the button pusher for pushing a button that I hard wired myself over lifetimes of careful consideration based on attachment to delusion.

Oh were hardly everywhere, only where misunderstanding abounds... why not try to correct peoples mis-understandings? Only ego's get mad. If you actually follow the threads fully, you might actually learn some things... because there is an escalation of clarity as questions get answered and questions are made. If your grumpy, get more sleep, or meditate more so that you can have a more objective outlook on life and not get caught up in subjective opinion making...

Why not?

Yeah... you don't know what your talking about, but that's ok, most people don't. There are two types of suffering, physical and psychological. Physical suffering is unavoidable, but experienced as Bliss when one is fully realized. Psychological suffering is something completely unnecessary according to Buddhism and basically a revelation of a lack of wisdom. Us Buddhists completely escape psychological suffering, while fully accepting and seeing through physical suffering, as it's just energy, and right view of energy actually transforms the experience into bliss and wisdom.

Indeed, well... that's fine. Your main focus is Taoism... yes? Buddhism has done the same as well as your lists above. Buddhism disarmed Ashoka too. The big king who conquered India in the late 200's B.C. can be read about a bit here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka_the_Great

We do agree with this, except we see the experience of the nature of things as not a substance but rather merely the realization of the inherent non-abiding nature, non-self nature, or non-inherent nature of all phenomena and experiences. The realization is not of a thing that is behind all things. That's where the Buddha get's quite sure in his assertion, that it's not the experience itself that is different, it's the way that it's interpreted that differs which leads either to total liberation, or re-absorption at the end of a cosmic eon. For us Buddhists... the experience of non-duality arises by seeing that all things are equally empty of inherent nature, thus the consciousness expands past phenomena, including itself, but where most paths reify this calling this experience the absolute Self, or true identity of all things, we see it as an experience that arises dependent upon the condition of seeing the real condition of all conditions. Get it? So anyway... yes indeed... I do agree with your tone and your virtue though... In that, we are quite the same. Tashi Delegs!! (Blessings)

Perfect! Even the Dalai Lama doesn't agree that all spiritual traditions are leading to the same goal. He believes as I've read that all traditions lead to higher rebirth if practiced correctly. Of course all spiritual traditions lead to the same goal if one wants to see that they all lead their adherents to the realization of Buddhism eventually, even after countless eons and rebirths! So, yes in that context they all do lead to the same Truth... The Dalai Lama is deeply studied in every single turning of the wheel from the Nikaya, to the Mahayana, to the Vajrayana, to the Dzogchen, which is his main practice. So is Namdrol. My main sutra teacher.

But... we do believe that all traditions lead to spiritual and human advancement if rightly utilized. In that, we are all the same and that's a very important similarity!

What if eventually you find this view to be reflective of narrow mindedness and dogmatic? I did... as I used to have a view quite similar to the one you just shared. It was a reflection of a lack of study and spiritual experience on my part and just a reflection of seeing this and that from here and there, mostly taken out of context and mis-interpreted from the whole context of the body that the piece of information came from. Best of luck... as if I believed in random occurrence.

We do at times exemplify the similarities in books or talks, but this is only in order to fulfill a deeper agenda, which is to make people of other traditions more comfortable with Buddhism by equating some aspects with their own religions. That way in the long run, the conversion process is not such an alien and sudden shock, but rather just a slow assimilation and eventual domination. I know, sounds cunning. But, we really have the best intentions, as we really do see Buddhism as being the most complete path on the planet. Of course, to outright say this, is probably detrimental to my cause. I'm really just being honest. Though at times, 100 percent honestly may not be the most desirable thing to be if one has a motive? I guess I don't have much of a motive... I just like to share and be completely honest and upfront about everything... it's a life long habit.

Skeptics base their logic on a lack of in depth experience based upon a lack of serious and devoted practice to meditation, contemplation and insight (vipassana). So, I can't ever take them seriously. They think we don't know for sure, but that's because they base their logic on the idea that only the appearance of death can show what's after death, when our logic shows that we can see through life right here and now while living. This means that we don't have to die to know about what's beyond this dimension of experience, because we transcend this dimension of experience even while we appear to be as normal as the next person and seemingly bound by it when in fact, we are not. Skeptics basically base their experience on a lack of experience. Of course being skeptical can be a good thing, if applied to the cause of being skeptical, as in be skeptical about your skepticism and it's basis for consideration. The basis in this case being the lack of beyond 5 sense dimension experience.

To a Buddhist the whole point to weather a practice will lead to the result of liberation is starting with the view of liberation. Method alone will not lead to liberation from Samsara which is the entire point of Buddhism. So, though a Buddhist could say... hey, that's wonderful, you practice a way that leads to a higher capacity in your next life, but it's not at all going to lead to the same result as Buddhism. So a Buddhist can merely accept another system as being what it is, and leading to where it leads, but as a Buddhist one can't lie to them self and say that they are the same good as they are different paths leading to different results. Though some of the outer aspects might indeed be the same. Also, Vajrayana spends tons of time working on the body and energy. I don't think Chinese Buddhism does the same at all because it's not Tantric. So, this quote is not at all talking about Vajrayana Buddhism because Vajrayana applies just as much time to body and energy as Taoism does, but also has much more philosophical clarity as to the reasons why one does the body and energy practices and how to think about them so that the intent towards the result is absolutely clear as body/mind are not separate. Buddhism has always been a path that has made more of a point to show the differences, while other paths try to be the same, but as Buddhism is more clear about what the goal of itself is, we can never agree with these assumptions of sameness, even if there are points of similarity, we interpret the entirety differently so really these apparent similarities are illusions based upon a mis-interpretation according to us Buddhists.

We don't have a cosmic mother or a great beginning in any literal sense. There's no beginning according to Buddhist Cosmology. No point of origin. There's not even a great spirit shared by all beings, as this is considered a Samsaric interpretation that leads to re-absorption at the end of this universe's expression.

It only sounds illogical to you because you don't understand the line of reasoning, you can't follow it because your attached to your own, that you can't make the leap into an objective way of viewing. Also... Nirvana if one does not see the Mahayana path would seem to end in an extinction of consciousness as the Hinayana interpretation seems to gather. But, in actuality because of the offering of merits and turning your past Samsaric connections since beginningless time into Nirvanic connections of endless time, one's consciousness does not extinct but in fact continues, moment by moment based on recognizing the always continuous empty nature of all things, consciousness and experiences. In that sense, one's self is eternal, only in as much as it originates dependent upon the realization of the fact that all things are inherently empty, so turns Samsaric connections into connections for everlasting Nirvana.

Yup, held together by a grasping at the self by the particles. Held together by the delusion of self identity ascribed to these particles by these particles. It's all relative and held together by the craving for self existence by this conglomeration of connected entities. The Buddhists didn't come up with this, of course you'll ignore my argument because it just completely subverts yours on a level that you can't handle and thus you get pissed off because it makes you feel insecure. Alaya Vijnana does not inherently exist, it is merely the craving for existence which happens on a very subtle, subtle level all the way into the formless realm of experience, deep in the unconscious mind. It's been explained, but your mind can't seem to make the leap to think from an entirely different paradigm. Because you identify with these entities that come together as a Brahmin self that thinks there is a Self of all and basing it on experience which is really not the fault of the experience but how it's interpreted. It's your attachment and identification that's in the way from objective viewing. The Alaya Vijnana is only new at around the 300's AD. explained by Asanga, but it's not new in it's revelation as it can be found alluded to in the Pali texts as Michaelz pointed out. The experience of oneness is not a substantial oneness, that all things are one, just that all things are equally empty and the consciousness expands past all things and permeates on a level beyond Samsaric recognition, it's not a dimension of merging into an already established Self. It's basically just seeing the inherent empty nature of all things and experiences. This has been explained to you, but you don't listen. This is what Buddhism means by Non-Dual and it's not the same as Vedanta's all is one substance Non-Dual system of interpretation of experience. Yes, they lack substantial singularity, but they are all equally empty of inherent existence, thus non-substantial non-dual experience is possible only when all things are seen through by the consciousness that see's past the Alaya Vijnana and ceases to identify it as a Self by seeing that it's dependently originated. I'm pretty sure you won't understand a thing I've said, and you might not even read it because you might have me blocked. You keep quoting commentary that completely mis-understands the meaning of the scripture and the intent of the scripture. Of course you'll choose these interpretations because they fit your bias, even though they go against the entire Buddhist Cannon. Oh well... Most people are destined to recycle for a very long time because of this clinging to existence through the notion of a self, just turned from individual to universal, still a conceit and a source of pride and attachment.

I'm from the planet of us... of course....

No I haven't, I hadn't even heard of it! I just looked it up, saw a trailer and now I'm into it! Thanks for the information... I'm a big time Buddhist movie buff. I'd be into some Taoist movies too! If they get into the spiritual meanings behind the martial arts and not just the martial arts.