Vajrahridaya

Non-conceptual is not the goal, but freedom from concepts and non-concepts is the goal. The experience itself cannot be described but the path to the experience can be described, as well as what the experiences qualities are, which is inherently empty. Even the experience of Buddhahood is not considered an ultimate reality in Buddhism, just an ultimate intuitive understanding of the nature of all experience.

You mean just the nature of co-emergent things processing regardless of the intention of survival... Yes ok... sorry for being so dense. But, you say fully armed and fighting all the way? For what purpose do you fight death which is merely a word describing change and not really a finality at all. Taoism believes that the mind stream lives on after the death of the body...

I'm in front of the computer, hiding from guns... kinda...

Lol... so literal... can you not see the implied meaning? I mean beings who are ignorant of the true nature of consciousness manifest non-sentient forms of consciousness that don't seem to be made of consciousness at all, such as matter in order to shine into physical mortality realms that are based on "Prakrit" or the dimension of darkness, blackness which veils our illumination/consciousness into dense body vessels. In higher realms, we are able to manifest things directly from our own consciousness and "will" immediately, depending on how subtle the realm is as there are many levels. Some realms are illumined by the beings that are there and there is no need for a physical sun. Because conscoiusness that is ignorant of it's own true nature is the ignorance. Just as an awareness that is aware of it's own unlimited illumination potentiality is that wisdom. I can unpack. But don't project assumptions based upon your limited interpretation of my way of speaking. As I'm trying to use words to explain non-dual experiencing of limited dualistic dimensions. It's difficult to communicate such non-thing through the linearity of word structures. You have to read intuitively, like poetry and see intention of the words and not get literal or bound by rules. Much like reading poetry. Because all this around us of the 3 dimensional realm is co-created by many consciousness' (plural), or many sentient beings, we are this matter, this density, this frictional experience dimension. That totally depends, because you speak a different language when it comes to metaphysical break downs. If we are coming from the same school of metaphysics, then it's easier. But yes, this is all good... these questions, because I wish to have more clarity and ability to speak cross conventions. None of the above. Well, sometimes I'm lazy... Or in a hurry because there are other things to do, or my girlfriend is tugging on my coat tales. Oh boy.... Being unaware of our source of liberation... the clarity and openness that is awareness... which is the ungraspable nature of all things, unrealized the mirror like quality of our awareness regardless of it's ignorance of itself manifests within it's own expansion through the joint intermingling with other sentient unaware awarenesses that have consensus of agreement on various levels, conscious of it or not By sending reflections of desires based on a sense of lack into the mirror like quality of our awarenesses The intensity of this desiring deflects back from awareness rigid images that shine dense and frictional, forgetting that these images are made of our joint power of creative awareness.... we suffer the play that is inherently liberated, due to having no intrinsic nature everything is inherently self liberated, including awarenesses, even if ignorant of it. It's liberation is also it's power of bondage, because it's so liberated, it can also be bound within it's own inherent liberation. I hope that's a bit more clear for ya. We pray to Buddhas and bodhisattvas... we also pray to certain hindu gods that are either bodhisattvas or just for worldly stuff... Some Hindu gods are considered Buddhas too in fact.

Only without proper guidence from a liberated master. When entering into other dimensional type of energy practices, one can open lots of really deep closets in the subconscious or unconscious mind, and one needs the protection of enlightened lineage from beyond the grave connected to living guidance. Because the practice is crossing the bridge between the 5 sense experience and transcendent of those limits type experiences.

It's also a time if one were liberated, one could really have their cake and eat it too, because of all the ignorance has created air planes, movies, all sorts of games and sports, computers, etc. Not that these are all healthy for human longevity, but if one is liberated, one can sure experience this play in lots of more possobilities without really falling for the trick, than during a time without gas driven thingies.... And manifesting these falsities through the power of conjoined mind's of agreed perspective.

Regardless of your interpretation of my ego, assumptions should be corrected. See through the appearance of ego and see the truth. Ego see's ego and truth see's truth, seeing right through the ego. Which there is plenty of to see through... I don't really care much about the book. I care more about the offer to be in Portugal? Is there space for my girlfriend? We are very free spirited people and love to laugh and play!! I'm sure the book is bias. I see nothing wrong with Taoism and see it as a healing and good practice. I'm just not convinced that it's a complete path to liberation in and of it's entire expression. Not that people attain liberation regardless of environmental or religious conditions as the causes for liberation have to do with internal interpretation of experiencing. Thus far it just seems that Buddhism has the entire circle completed in method and philosophy within it's many, many approaches and it's complete understanding of relativity.

In Vedic tradition and Buddhist tradition it's called "Kali Yuga" and Kali in this sense is not the goddess Kali, but the demon Kali. Where most people are influenced by material gains, the leaders of the world are more about personal power than the people. At the same time, it's the time when if one were truly spiritually inclined, one could attain realization very fast, because of how fast karmas happen and can be burnt through for someone who has realization of the path to realization.

Other than the fact that you can do whatever you want of course, but from a Buddhist perspective I think... If one wants to call the endless/beginningless process of infinite relativity God, just as a metaphor, that's fine... but one has to understand that upon investigation, that's just a metaphor and there really is nothing inherently there as a true and static self.

Wow, you certainly have some squared up assumptions. We experience incredible sex, have great fun, dance, there are even consorts that became Buddhas by understanding experientially the view of dependent origination and emptiness, thus spontaneous liberation in every moment of experiencing. The tenet system of the first turning as in the Theravada view are disciplines for those that don't have the capacity to understand much deeper, and this statement might stir some ego's who might read this. If you think Buddha's teaching is that limited my dear? You haven't read from any of the 84 Mahasiddhas, which even includes a Butcher. But yeah, if one is truly a Buddha, no broken heart because of a lack of attachment to identity and a complete vision of that see's transience as transparent. So what comes comes and what goes, goes. Buddhist Cosmology and teaching is far more complex than you have considered. There are many systems of teaching for different types of people. The Buddha Shakyamuni himself taught in many different ways and gave different types of disciplines for different people at different stages of personal evolution, or just because of individual differences. There's 84,000 different ways of teaching that seem contradictory in the entire Buddhist Cannon in fact, but only because of the different types of people. The state of realization transcends any limitations, your even allowed to have orgies with other highly realized beings, or anybody really if the intention is an offering. Orgies with other highly realized beings have a specific intention that is not only the blessing of great fun, but also to intermingle the highest unlimited realization with previous limitations of conduct that might be enlodged deep in a persons subconscious due to having gone through different limiting tenet systems or religious systems, it's individual and complex. Actually enlightenment inherently has nothing to do with any limitations of conduct, these are just practices and disciplines used to re-orient a persons interpretation of the energy of expression and experience. Which is something Westerners have a hard time with when all of a sudden some great being had sex with someone, or ate some meat, they freak out, and this is only due to the limited view these people have by defining enlightenment by superficial boundaries. Those that mix up the tenets of the different systems of Buddhadharma don't understand co-dependent origination. Dzogchenpa's especially don't have any such limitations and in fact as long as Rigpa, or awareness of emptiness nature of all relativity has been initiated in one, this state can be integrated with any arising experience or desire, thus turning any experience from selfish to selfless regardless of it's appearance. Once the true nature of things is known directly, one has absolutely no limitations in conduct.. per say. Of course, one will still act with virtue (relative to the moment and not contrived virtue) and love for all beings, so becoming a serial killer or hit man is most likely not going to be included in the possible job list of a Dzogchenpa. But... really these conditions of limitation that are used in lower tenet systems originate dependent upon the necessity of beings with a certain capacity that requires limitation for the sake of re-orientation. Omniscience in Buddhism doesn't mean knowing every particular thing that's ever happened and that will happen, rather they understand how all things happen and how experience happens on an intuitive experiential level. So, this is different from the Western interpretation of omniscience. Though a Buddha can indeed close his or her eyes and see through time and space on a quantum leaping level if so necessary. One can not really sneak up on a Buddha either, or trick a Buddha, unless they want to let it happen, just for the play of it... for whatever reason within infinite relativity.

Brahmanism, Theism and it seems Taoism as well implies that everything is based upon a first cause, a causeless cause, a first impulse, that all will comes from this primal infinite potentiality that is based upon itself, it's own mystery, this nameless force or power behind everything. Buddhism see's that the power is an endless chain of causation with no beginning at all, and no single source. So yes, it's a more complex cosmology. So then... is the Tao a first cause that itself is not an effect? If so, it is in no way compatible with the Truth that Buddhism reveals.

Ah, again, that "nature" concept. The ramifications of that implied limitation is generally not investigated.

I don't know if I'll be able to explain this well enough for people to really understand right now. But, what most people aren't understanding is that the idea that seems to be in both Taoism, definitely in Hinduism, and all other Theisms. Is that, if there is a ONE source of all existence that is there at the beginning of this universal expression, that all things manifested from. That this is implying that it chose every single thing that is going to happen and that did happen, either just out of Random Chaos that is ordered by this first pulse at the beginning. As it's the first cause of all things. Because of it, the uncaused causer, all this happens, and that there is no free will at all. That we did not chose anything that happened or happens to us, even this moment, so many subtle causes and conditions decided by that very first pulsation of willing expression of the one into many. This is a very subtle realization here and it's hard to really put it into words, because one has to think about the endless ramifications of a single action, that has infinite conditions for it to be here, including me typing on this board. That if there is indeed a first cause, than that first cause is a will, is a God... even the Tao if equated as a first cause, then is an intelligence that is omnipotent and is making all this happen. That it chose the first condition for each and every sentient being to manifest and thus all the infinite ramifications of that first inter-connective multiplicity from that "one".... that all this is one with yet seemingly multiplied into endless differences. Because this won't make any logical sense, this one before the universe is considered a mystery in every substantialist eternalistic spiritual tradition, from Hinduism, Taoism, Christianity, Islam, etc. God is omnipotent, this source is the source of all things, so it's omnipotent and chose the first expression to rumble on and on in an endless chain of events into everything that we see now only to re-absorb everything back into itself as one with it. This presumes a will, that is a doer all on it's own without any prier cause for this to happen. Buddhism just doesn't agree with this assumption of a mysterious will that we should all be humble to and surrender to. That's why in Buddhism, there is no mysterious source, no mysterious god or will, because there is no beginning, there is no one that all things spring from. How to use words to pin-point the subtle ramifications of the illogic of this idea? Then of course most schools go... "oh, but the Truth is beyond logic and thought." But in Buddhism, it is not beyond logic and is not beyond explanation and is not beyond thought, though the experience of this realization is beyond thought, the explanation of it, is not. Through very subtle language, one can explain absolutely how everything works to a subtle listener if one knows how to unpack connective concepts and see the ramifications within infinite complexity. This is why Buddhism has the largest Cannon of explanation scriptures in the entire world. Because for a Buddha, there is no mystery, there is indeed Om-niscience, that seems like non-sense to those who just give in to the ease of... "oh it's just a mystery and enlightenment is surrender to this mystery, that only this mystery is omniscient." The Buddha's peace is not this ignorance, it's not this excuse to not investigate deeper. Which is why the Buddha considered meditative Samadhi or meditative cultivation a path of golden chains if vipassana or insight meditation (application of D.O.) was not used in conjunction. Thus... you will continue to recycle and will never have endless freedom because you don't realize that you are the cause of your own effect since beginningless time, that there is no one to surrender to. There is no supreme cause, no source of existence, only your own investment banking system. Buddhism explains how this current universe came into existence based upon the end of the previous universe. There is no primary cause at all... it's just a cycle of endless causes and conditions, from formless multiplicity to form filled multiplicity back to formless multiplicity over and over again. That formless multiplicity seems like a oneness because all the multitudeness has been suppressed into hidden potentiality, like a hard drive storage in a computer. The ramifications of the Buddhas teachings completely denies the idea of a substantial oneness that we all come from and return to at the end of the cosmic eon. We are all connected to the point of no essential individuality, but we are also not one substance, or one mind. It explains exactly how one realizes free will as free from limiting conditions. That one's will is only free when one realizes that there is no self, either no one essential nature that all is or no true individual outside of endless relativity. That the only free will is that will that see's that there is only a chain of causes and conditions and that the action of a Buddha is merely the actions that reflect the awareness of endless interconnection, thus is merely a servant of the all. This is hard to put into words. I'm probably not in a lucid enough state right now to really put it into proper words. Sometimes I feel that I am connecting to the conditions of proper expression, which is also based upon relative conditions. People that are attached to a final identity, or a beginning identity, or total oneness that is the beginning of all being, won't understand the ramifications of this speech. Then again, I might be wrong. So is the Tao just the continual process of recycling infinite cosmoses with no static "I" ness or beginning? Or is it a beginning of all things that just expresses mysteriously all infinite possobilities throughout endless time over and over again without reason? Being one, then modifying into manyness then pulling it all back into the collective experience of oneness who's realization is considered enlightenment over and over again? Thus any single person can never really be free, nor really has any will, as this process is just an endless super will that is all of our wills, to explode manyness from it's own uncaused self, to implode back into it's own uncaused self out of it's own will to do so without reason other than to just suffer over and over again through endless beings just to do it? Talk about cosmic narcissism... I cannot compare. Buddhism doesn't believe in a substantial oneness in that sense. Just interconnectivity that is essentially empty of essence since beginningless time. No source... just endless causes and conditions based upon both realized beings co-creating conditions for other peoples enlightenment based on the fact that there are unenlightened beings, and unrealized beings doing the opposite for themselves and others through form and formlessness based on a sense of fear and separation? So subtle the ramification's, easy to consider, hard to think about and harder to write down.

I don't expect anyone to believe me. I have experience that is not provable in the court of law. Buddhism speaks of this in various scriptures that are believed to be true. Bon or Tibetan Shamanism was supposedly the last dwindling aspects of the last Buddha, who's name escapes me, but both Bon scriptures and Buddhist scriptures speak of this person. Bon was in Tibet before Vajrayana came there and it already was somewhat close in cosmology without a God to what Buddhism was, and also in certain practices. If one studies anthropology a bit more, there are congruences that support my statement. They differ in way's that are about the different needs of different people really. They all agree on various criteria of no supreme creator God, that all is dependently originated and empty of inherent existence. They differ in interpretatin of rules for monks and methods here and there. In Mahayana they differ in various discussions on whether Buddhanature is inherent or just potential relative to the fact of inherent relativity. Silly. We experience bliss while living, seeing past the illusion of death which is merely a change of environment for the mind stream. The term natural becomes a term more often than not that excuses one's ability to investigate deeper. Nature is dependently originated. Most nature comes from the desire for survival which emanates from the fear of death, based upon identification with the body and the idea that we were born, and we will age and die. Your conclusion lacks investigation in my opinion. This might make your ego angry... hearing this. It might get defensive.

Buddhahood is not static, it's just constant recognition of D.O./Emptiness on an experiential level, where the awareness is constantly inspired by infinite interconnection/compassion. It's flipping your beginningless history of interconnection as an individual mind stream clinging to an identity for joy and pleasure, into an endless recognition of interconnection of pure offering... love in action... compassion towards your beginningless connections. Thus those that connect with you as a Buddha, have connected with you previously as a non-Buddha. Life is not simple. The realization is simple, but it's actualization is deeply complex in it's nuances. Those that have flipped the subconscious... consciously through meditation and start going through the Tandra states of meditation, where one flips through the subconscious files, the abstract connections within one's endless history, one starts experiencing past lives too directly and one starts seeing abstract beyond sense logic. Seems like non-sense for those without experience of this, I know. Probably much like what it sounded like to people who were described the pyramid's back before the day's of cameras on the other side of the world by world travelers to their listeners. There is a process where one uses the desires and seeking in a way that is beneficial though. Seeking for the truth of the nature of things, desiring the inner experience of freedom through meditation. One should indeed use that energy in a way that is positive and not suppressive. Seeking freedom through meditation is like trying to fly by jumping off a cliff. In a way... It's using desire to end itself. The Mahayana way of using seeking liberation is by offering that desire to the upliftment of all beings. Saying and praying to one's own mind. I seek liberation for the sake of all beings!! May I realize the bliss of liberation in order to help all beings realize this essential truth of existence. It's a catch 22 in way's worth contemplating. Trying to kill the ego only empowers the ego, because that act gives it the benefit of existing in a tangible sense. Using it selflessly is a better way to just turn it into a vessel of positive offering.

It's just endless co-karmic-arisings since beginninglessness. The movement is based upon striving arising from a sense of lack. The enlightened striving is based upon the sense of offering to those that experience a sense of lack. So, this is the difference between Samsaric action and complexity and Nirvanic action and complexity. It's just intention that changes, not really the appearance per say, in an absolute sense. It's just the state of inner interpretation, or inner perception. Samsaric experiencing is a mis-cognition of experience period. Nirvana is a correct cognitive experience of Samsara. You'd really have to focus... and contemplate the considerations, as in unpack. Yes, some might and some might not. So be it. I wish I could talk the perfect way for all beings considering the complexity of all the nuances of neurosis per person. The Buddha was really good at that, which is why he was a wheel turning Buddha. I'm not even a Buddha... just someone on the Bodhisattva path with a level of experiencing that may be deemed abnormal to most here on Earth. But basically this is what I'm saying about the difference between Hinayana interpretation and Mahayana interpretation of spiritual practice, which changes the over-all fruit.

It's not one consciousness, it's consciousness', in groups of consensual complex co-dependent agreements for the period of times of co-experiencing. These realizations are spontaneous and not complex really. Which people can't seem to get for the most part, that when one experiences and see's emptiness directly not in a dualistic sense, which is seeing the simple/complexity simultaneously in a beyond thought inclusive of thought paradigm. It's all simultaneous. It's not one big mindstream, though experientially so for those that agree to that, thus the origination of such experience depends upon cooperation on subconscious consensus. If one follows the meaning of the words deep into the ramifications of, one should have an epiphany while reading. One looses the grasping identification. It's not a transformation in that sense, it's a realization. Thus consciousness is not altered, it's just dis-en-hardened.

This is exactly why there is no cosmic essence. There is only infinite potentiality. Not concrete Self, no true nature of all things, except that it's all dependently originated and inherently empty of static being. Even the experience of timelessness is merely a state of focus based upon opposing the state of time and removing awareness of concepts and those identities thus suppressing for a timeless moment the experience of multitudeness, which is not the same as the non-duality of Buddhism. There is only relativity and emptiness. Emptiness does not mean the meditative void, as that's explained as a Jhana or Samadhi in Buddhism and the realization of emptiness transcends all states of absorption and non-absorption. There is no true formless reality that shines from it's own side as an absolute, that's merely a state of focus and is also dependently originated and empty of inherent independent existence. Though the fact that all is inherently empty leads to the realization of non-duality, in a different context, thus there is a different way that one actualizes the experience through the specifics allocated through Buddhist wisdom and method. If Tao just means the constant impermanence of mutual co-arising experiences and things, and non-things, without true pin-pointable nature, then that's the dharma. But there seems to be descriptions of the Tao as some formless and absolute reality that is beyond the senses and concepts that all things find identity in. That would merely lead to recycling at the end of a cosmic eon as that's a subtle type of formless clinging to or absorption into an, "I AM THAT" as a static essential nature of all things. Saying that oneness is absolute truth. As if all things were the modification of one essential substance beyond concepts.. Buddhism points to a truth subtler than this. Sometimes I think Taoism does then other times I don't. Of course one can never know how one experiences concepts internally on a deeply transcendent state speaking of the Immortals. But, Buddhism seems to describe this and have methodology that realizes this directly in a way that is streamlined and clear since the first turning of the wheel, through to the 4th (Dzogchen) that does not appear in other traditions as if the realization is indeed different. But, there seem to be those lineages within Taoism that lead to the same realization of Jalus as it is in Dzogchen. But is the motivation total compassion and service towards the endless mis-apprehension of Samsaric co-creation? Or is it selfish for, "me"? This would change whether it would be a ongoing realization of "no-self" or not, thus merely appearing the same but not really the same realization at all. ? One after the truth of the nature of all things, inquires about the nuances from a perspective even beyond the expression of the question as thought formulations, that seem sticky and semantic, but it's deeper than this... this form of questioning.

We do it all the time. Also, Buddhism is older than the Buddha. As he said, he found an ancient path. There was a wheel turning Buddha on Earth 30,000 years before this current Buddha. We figure everything out, and we transcend the figure who tries to configure.

It's delusion to think that things are simply what they appear to be. Your turning a metaphor about the meaning of things into a literal interpretation. What the whole phrase pointing at the moon means is in reference to the meaning of a teaching. That the body of the Buddha's teachings leads to an entirely different realization than that of Taoism is what the meaning of the phrase is talking about. Not literally pointing to the moon. To figure out the nature of the moon and the sky is to know your own nature as well. If your practice does not point to a wisdom that transcends death and suffering, then the practice and philosophy is quite limited. Before you know it you'll be on your death bed facing a mystery that you never prepared for. That's the only sure thing that death will happen, unless you cultivate enough to attain the body of light, like that discussed in Dzogchen and certain types of Taoism. But, what Michael is saying is that, part of freeing oneself from suffering is understanding it's causes and conditions. Which also means realizing the causes and conditions of everything in a general sense.

Yes, Nagarjuna is credited with the expansion of what the Buddha taught. So it is considered the Buddha's emptiness. As Theravada does not equate dependent origination with a Self either or atta and anatta is a part of the Theravada doctrine. The Buddha did deny a universal essence that one can take refuge in, in the Pali Suttas. Also concerning a universal self. It just seems sometimes that the experiential interpretation of the Tao is something similar to what the Buddha denied in that. Sometimes not. So... there doesn't seem to be consensus of what the Tao actually is on an experiential level, as in what it's trying to name, as in how the beyond concepts is being equated in terms of ontological experience. I don't see that it's necessarily pointing to the same moon. Though I could be wrong because I'm not a Taoist scholar.

Only to a scared Westerner who has immature ideas about sex. Nope, it's a real deal thing in old Tibet. Nothing cultish about it. Just one of the many aspects of Vajrayana. Of course if the guy ejaculated and the intention was just to have pleasure, then yes, that would be a mis-use of power. Your of course welcome to your subjective opinion about it all.

Like Magitek said, my experience turned inward and I was able to have internal experiences and have orgasms without ejaculating, and even have multiple orgasms. Plus yes, my dick got a whole lot bigger!!

Maybe in China but Vajrayana has Highest Yoga Tantra which includes sexual practices that lead to liberation. Certain Ngagpa's (lay tantric practictioners) of Tibet were able to give flesh initiation to women after women for day's, show them the nature of reality and not loose their seed (ejaculate) in the process, giving these women the type of orgasm that leads to spiritual awakening. Man, that looks interesting, but talk about costing an arm and a leg!

There is still a process that ignorance has in order to be dense 3 dimensions. All states, forms of consciousness and all the infinite conscious beings are all inherently empty and interconnected add infinitum. Each point leads to every other point. Neither one, nor many. It's quite non-dual. Just not substantial non-duality. You mis-understand the intention of my post. Which I guess is my fault, sometimes I assume that people will understand the cosmology. But if one has no training in the tradition or reading of it, then the reference is completely lost in translation. What I was talking about was the process that one's consciousness undergo's from the beginning of a cosmic cycle to go from refined consciousness that illumines 360 to dense forms of housed in the body consciousness. It goes through a process of limiting veils in an evolution of dis-enlightenment, or dis-illumination before one even enter's into this dimension that is surrounded by black space.