Vajrahridaya

One can see dependent origination in everything if so inclined. The clarity of presentation does not seem to be as succinct though. What's this.. Tao that exists before the universe came into being? Something that's whole and complete in and of itself that precedes the universe? This is also from the Tao De Ching. But, sure it's a way of pointing, but I still think it's not so clear. It' doesn't seem to transcend beginning in initial presentation. Then again it all depends upon how it's translated, because Dzogchen uses the language of since the beginning mind is pure and unsullied. Even though the buddha say's since beginningless time the mind is pure and unsullied. Of course it's all semantics, but symbols are what's used so the clearest are the best. Dzogchen is saying since the moment that mind is apprehended. The Buddha is saying that even if mind is not apprehended.

You got that freakin' right! I remember when in 95'-96', I'd walk down the street in NY when I worked at Tavern on the Green. I would walk from 103rd and Central Park West down to Tavern everyday for work, and everyday I would be crying much of the way. Sometimes people would stop and ask what's wrong!? I'd be waving my hands in the air like a crazy person. I'd say... what's wrong? Everything's so right!! I'm a little more conventional about my expression now as people don't understand such things so it's more of a deterrent than anything positive, but it was a very nice phase for me. If you have a secret camera, you can catch me crying out of joy almost everyday in private enough times to call me a sissy with good reason.

Yes, that's a complete system. That's my Rinpoche.

Nope, I have no experience with the Thai Forest tradition, which is why I said, I wasn't even thinking of that with my comment as it was indeed besides the point. The Buddha ran for a bit, had a realization, came back, saw there was nothing to run from. The Buddha also said, not to be absolutely attached to precepts that are all relative. There is different vinaya for certain beings and certain times, certain samayas that should not be broken and then at times transcended. Root downfalls happen if one is practicing a certain practice and there are various disciplines that if broken, one receives the consequences. It's all very relative and it's not necessary to be a monk to attain the realization of a Buddha. Blessings are all wonderful... and happen in many ways. For you too!

Or at least expand the mirror to include the universe... well... it's all so personal really and what one needs for one's life and evolution, which is also deeply subjective and we don't always know what's right, even if it feels right. Anyway... I'm not passing judgement and that wasn't my intention at all. I was just stating a metaphor for the most part.

I have spent time in seclusion, many years. I experienced very deep states of whatever... The forest tradition is generally speaking, a hinayana path and not mahayana. But even Mahayanists go through periods of isolation, but they do it with the intention of realizing the nature of things for the sake of all beings. Just look at the Tibetans who go into caves for years and years for retreat, but they come out to give and to socialize and to be with others, drink, play, laugh, listen to music, have fun, give transmission, chant in groups, maybe get a wife and have some kids to help keep the lineage alive. If you read my statement, it's not sweeping, as I said everyone must go through their own phase to phase out attachment to a phase. "My" experience is still subjective and probably necessary for you in whatever point. But, as the Buddha did, once realized, you turn the mirror around. The forest tradition in general follows a different kind of intention, as it's more for self liberation than universal liberation. Though, individuals are individuals and will have their own realization and understanding. But, as a rule, Mahayana is about universal intent for realization. Besides my intent was not aiming at a specific tradition. I wasn't thinking Thai Forest tradition when I made my statement. I was in fact just speaking in general. Retreat is important, so is renunciation during a certain point in a persons path. I'm just giving another side to the coin, flipping it a bit. Neither good nor bad, heads or tails.

Everyday mundane things are amazing aren't they?

Everyone has a phase they must go through in order to reveal themselves to themselves and forest monking it may be a part of it. But, generally it's a way of avoidance, thinking that the appearance of things, and the multifariousness of public life is somehow in the way of realization. so people renounce it as if this were the true way to realization. It can be, if you are in that phase where you need to be a recluse, of course. But, when it all comes down to it, one wants to spread the experience, the feeling, share the good news, even if you don't talk about it per-say and just talk about mundane things, one infuses all mundane activity with the realization of one-taste. The state of realization is enjoyed even more when it's shared. Which is the difference between the Hinayana school and the Mahayana school of thought of Buddhism. If one is not aware of these schools, then it's good to find out things if one's interest is perked as such. In the end one must renounce renunciation, and just recline with the flow, when it's true nature is realized of course.

That's beautiful! That's what I felt in NYC. That's what I saw. Take care... Keep that candle lit and burning bright!! Fan that flame!

That's only good for people who are sensitive towards your dimension of personal enlightenment. As in every enlightened being channels enlightenment into and through their karma. So, if a person has a karmic connection that's strong to the person from past lives, than presence is all that's needed. Otherwise, one would have to learn other way's, like clever speech, or subtler avenues. Thank you by the way. Looks can be deceiving... but in my case, it's not.

At first you run it up, because generally we are catching it on the bottom three then moving down from that limited level awareness of personhood, sexual and desire, with the upper four knotted, so we bring it up to make aware the subtler elements of one's consciousness, then when opened, from the top down to ground it and center it in the heart where it balances up and down polarities, which is really not as linear as it sounds on paper or diagram. It's really a multi-dimensional thing, or inter-dimensional. If you have gotten the upper dimensions opened and you swing it down, it makes it good for attracting ladies because your animal becomes powerful in a positive sense. Also guys like you because you seem Alpha.

We must be like a golden cup to receive and hold the dragon milk. We must be like a diamond in order to sparkle brilliantly to attract many to the path of great blessing.

Without open hearted and minded discussion how does one clarify the meaning and integrate the various attainments with daily routine and people. Which is really what it's all about, unless you want to be a forest monk who just enjoys baking the cake but doesn't get to eat it too.

LOL! Perfect!

Oh yeah!! I just love the new topic tags, they are sooo $%&*in' funny!! Indeed nac. I totally agree. I was talking about Vedanta, how it resolves into a fixed view that is itself the substratum of all being. It's the view that is itself the fixation in Vedanta. While the view in Buddhism is the viewless view.

A Bodhisattva doesn't necessarily give up their chance at enlightenment, they just do it for the sake of others instead of merely self realization. The intention is different. They set out to attain realization FOR others. It's a different experience in the mind stream all together as is my own experience when I went from the desire for mere self realization, and transcending everyone to actually doing it for the sake of beings. It creates a whole other assortment of connectivity with beings. Where one actually has to learn how to be more down to Earth. Consciousness of D.O. as it actually is, is release of abiding conscious identity. This Tao is a state of absorption beyond thought. It's merely a subtle state of consciousness. When one comes out of this state one see's everyone start to kind of re-manifest so then one thinks that everything is a manifestation of this Tao. It's subtler in the experience of the meditation than it is in the explanation. But, Taoism is a substantial non-duality, while Buddhism is non-substantial. As in Tao is the substance behind and of what things are made of. It's considered a wholeness that is pure being that is pryer to thingness. A background of a sort that all things are one with. It's considered the identity of things. The true abiding reality of all things. Buddhism's non-duality is merely just recognizing that all phenomena even non-conceptual experiences beyond time are dependently originated and inherently empty of being in and of it's or themselves.

Dwai makes plenty of personal attacks and Michael is actually right. Also, Michael has not even really started a strong formal practice yet, though his logic and reason is pretty strong you can't hold all of Buddhism accountable to him. I would question your logic and reason. This is a very nice synopsis. It doesn't resolve into a fixed view that is itself the view that is the fixation.

Yes, he is a pretty strong character.

Yes, but that's just talking about dependent origination, where no essence is found. From all practical purposes, this can be a mis-used quote, because relatively, there are enlightened beings. Though ultimately, there is only display, so an enlightened being is known by that display which may either be conventional or non-conventional..."crazy wisdom".

He still seems to reify an ultimate transcendent consciousness. Which is very easy to do and most traditions do this, because for the most part, we're just destined to recycle over and over again. Oh, by the way I heard of him many years ago and I've heard of this new book. This is not the first time I've seen Thomas Campbell. Thanks though, it's all nice but average and a perspective I've been hearing of my entire life. It would be the first stage for someone who has never heard this before though.

In Taoism they come from a reified non-conceptuality. That's different and not seeing the dependent origination that the Buddha taught and saw directly beyond anything being a beginning. From Tao Wiki: "There was something undefined and complete, existing before Heaven and Earth. How still it was, how formless, standing alone and undergoing no change, reaching everywhere with no danger of being exhausted. It may be regarded as the mother of all things. Truthfully it has no name, but I call it Tao (TTC, chapter 25)" That would be a reification of a non-conceptual substance that is a beginning of things, or an existence that is before the beginning of things. Buddhism see's that as conditional and not transcending dependent origination which is beginningless. Taoism is just ultimating a substantial Truth beyond concepts that is always existent. It's pretty much the same as Brahmanism, or Vedanta. This is not the same as Buddhist realization. Buddhas see that state as basically a state of meditative absorption when all the "gunas" or "tattvas", which are basically principles of reality, suppressed into a non-actualizing potentiality. It's basically calling the illumined deep unconsciousness experienced in deep sleep, or that dimension said to be beyond that as the ultimate Truth. To the Buddha that is just a state of mental focus on a formless space of consciousness, but not ultimate Truth.

Neither are you a true Hindu if you want to lay judgement. A true Buddhist is a Buddha from one point of view. Then again, what constitutes a true Buddhist? From one point of view, I am a true Buddhist as I ascribe to the real meaning of the texts layed out by the Buddha and Buddhas since antiquity and practice that view all the time regardless of arising conditions based upon conditions (primary and secondary conditionalities), no matter what others think is being done, because that's just based upon endless limited conditions as well. I always rely on the meaning of the texts from a Dzogchen point of view. As well as integration of the initiation of the experience of Rigpa from the standpoint of the inherently empty nature of the 6 realms and 31 planes. So, it seems to me that your acting from insecurity as your view of Buddhism has been debunked over and over again through both scripture and personal experience, as well as scholarly opinion.

Nirvana is simply Samsara understood completely through and through to the point of translucent transparency. No, Buddhism does not believe in non-existence. There is only existence, and dependent origination describes how existence works. It doesn't work from an ultimate substance, it works from a standpoint of infinite regress, or endless regress of causes and conditions. Thereby, ultimately there is no existence to speak of in and of itself in the moment, because each moment depends on the previous moment. It's subtler than black and white, existence non-existence. Dependent origination just reveals how existence flows as empty of inherent essence.

All religions generally consider the universe to be an elaboration, or a manifestation, a modification of a single essence, or source, including Taoism. Buddhism seems to be the only spiritual tradition that does not. Which is why the Buddha did say that it's a new teaching and that the Buddha was most likely not taught by anybody alive on Earth at the time, because he said that this teaching did not exist on Earth at that time. Non-Buddhists want to say, oh, that part was a lie, that was not true, he never said that. But it exists in the same context that all the other teachings do that people in other religions want to believe in. The thing is, is that the Buddha was the only spiritual fore father to teach steadily for 40 years an entirely new tradition and be very clear about it largely without metaphors that could be construed in many different ways. Everyone else can go ahead and be in denial and attached to their emotional excuses. If you practice well self inquiry and meditation, one will attain higher rebirths anyway and come to understand deeper in a direct sense, than they do now. All the similarities between religions are there up to a point, but that point is only to the edge of Samsara. If one is to really to be free eternally, one must intuitively comprehend dependent origination and all it's ramifications.