Vajrahridaya

That was just an elucidation that there is no footing, not a crutch to rely on other than the realization of interdependent origination. Because a Buddha see's the non-inherent nature of action and being, in order to be a Buddha one must recognize that though beings don't inherently exist, they experience a "real" suffering, thus the only cause of their activity is this fact. Thus their bliss is the activity of helping others along the way to liberation, and that is all. Selfless service... but true selfless service, not in the same way that a theist would use that term to serve an essence called God. The ignorant fool suffers, the Buddha does not. That is the difference, both are dependently originated though. One experience's interdependency as Nirvana and the other as Samsara. Huge difference. One knows exactly the way out and the other is trapped in identity and grasping. No... it's not just based on words and logic. I do have experience... let's talk view though and how liberation is understood. You will never know through this frame the depth or shallowness of my experience. Yes... not sustained though. I've been to the realm of the Siddhas and more... Your thinking a bit black and white aren't you? All or nothing? Right View is the very first of the 8 fold noble path to the cessation of suffering in Buddhism. Like Mike said... your car can be souped up and hyper fast, but if you have not cleaned your windshield, your driving blind. View is incredibly important in Buddhism and extremely subtle to the point where one can actually experience directly just by comprehending the view without even a moment of sitting. Though I've done plenty of sitting... mudra-ing, yoga-ing and chanting as well as selfless service and bowing down.

Thanks White Tiger. At this point I'm just enjoying seeing the clarity. I'm gaining clarity from all this and I haven't written on the Dharma for quote some time so am enjoying the inspiration to write. Seeming dualism is just that. This is a discussion venue, the seemingness of the duality through this venue is quite concrete. I never said I was a Buddha, just a Buddhist. That's my point, considering the ultimate experience something non-conceptual is a subtle attachment to a "state of mind beyond thought" and calling "it" absolute, or ultimate. Tell me, does the Tao exist regardless of if your realization of it? I do appreciate your best though... May that boomerang back to you!

Saw in teaching and glimpses or sustained states of experience through intense practice. I never reached what was called the culmination of the Siddha Shaivite tradition. There are beings in Shaivism who are much more advanced in their path than I am in mine, but still have wrong view and won't attain what is called the "cessation of suffering" as it is elucidated by the Buddha. A show of siddhis regardless of having them is not what this is about, we are discussing sutra and view, and the importance of view in Buddhism vs. the non-importance of view in Advaita. Your ability to see my siddhis is predicated on how karmically connected we are through dependently originated past lives. The state of parashiva is still subtly reified in Shaivism. Abhinavagupta gives all credit to the Lord Shiva, that which is the reality of all being. It's still a top down approach and view, not a cutting through and emptying of footing. Read the 36 tattvas, Buddhism cuts through this. There's still subtle identity and eventual re-absorption into a, "source of being", that which even penetrates the non-existent, so it's said in Shaiva scripture. Like I said karma of bondage extends even into the non-conceptual.

Because the view is different. So, I can talk sutra. View predicates experience, regardless of technique and practice. View will condition or de-condition experience dependently. The view is different thus the outcome is different.

Essence as in an essential nature that is real and stable, or an always, regardless if conceived or experienced as dynamic or static or both or neither. Just mind streams, karmic collections of individual dependently originated seeming selfhoods, that collectively make up the so called, "All". I looove your Avatar, that's hilarious!!!

Yes, I know how to do it and what it's good for. It purifies the nadis or energy flow in the system, focuses the energy of mind and body, it is used in various Highest Yoga Tantra practices, including genuine sexual tantra, none of that neo-tantra please. Other than that, to get some genuine knowledge, one would have to go to a genuine Vajrayana master, because I'm not qualified to give specific information on method. I'll just talk sutra.

Not in this life, (past life yes) just a little Tai Chi and Kung Fu theory and practice. I've read most of the major texts and some lineage texts. I've done the I-Ching my entire life. Very good stuff there, but not ultimate teaching in my opinion, but very good teaching. The I-Ching is quite amazing with the Triagrams and predicting based upon personal energy flow, intention, subconscious linking with conscious, into the throw and it's reflective outcome reading. It's pretty amazing how all our energy connect on various levels. Very good. I have some really incredible stories about the I-Ching from personal experience that reveal it's credibility. My mom taught me it when I was very young and she has been doing it with me my entire life.

Exactly, realization in Buddhism is dependent upon a realization, not a union.

That's my point exactly, there is no formless realm in Buddhism "that cannot be named" that is ultimate truth. There is NO footing! Enlightenment is a realization of dependent origination, not an inherent quality-less eternalness beyond name, form, or time that all things actually are in whole. That is just not so in Buddhism. All that non-conceptualness is part of Samsara as well. That too is dependently originated. karmas extends into the non-conceptual, into that which cannot be named. Just thinking in terms of, "That which cannot be named" is a reflection of a reified experience beyond thought, name and form. A high level bliss realm or state of mind that feels one with an all. The experience of an inherent essence of all things that allows for the sense of union or oneness.

Buddhism supposedly has something like 83,000 ways leading to the same end of suffering? There is only one way to view the cosmos as it truly works. The cosmos works in a certain way, it's very deep and complex, thus one MUST understand interdependent origination to free oneself. There is no other way to completely free oneself. This one way does have many methods to it's realization though.

Oh your welcome! One more point. For a Buddhist, experience is dependently originated, thus what one's view is, deep within and throughout many lifetimes of so many types, this manifests over and over again cyclically, from lower to higher re-births, back to lower, from long lived gods, to short lived humans and animals, demons, hungry ghost realms. Most of the higher views revolve around the idea of a single essence and experience this. This is the power of the empty nature or non-abiding nature of phenomena. Even conceptual free meditation and states of mind are considered to be dependent upon a view and manifest accordingly. Because there is no essence... anything can happen! This is why "Right View" is the first teaching in the 8 fold noble path which is the 4th nobel truth. Experience originates dependent upon view. Thus, dependent origination. One must have the right view to experience directly what the Buddha experiences. Be Well!!

Actually I can and have. Buddha is merely a being like me who saw dependent origination directly, me only in glimpses, but close enough to have an understanding of Buddhas meaning when he also argued with Brahmin's and Jains even Mahavira. Buddha was an elitist. Dependent Origination reveals how truly complex the universe is, and how it's not all going in one direction. Which is the basic view that all paths lead to the same truth go upon. Dependent Origination reveals how truly chaotic the order of all things are. So it's not a new age Monist view. You be well. Are you trying to say nothing is an ultimate truth? Oh boy... As Nagarjuna said... "One who adopts emptiness as a view is thereby pronounced incurable"

They do... it's called ultimating an ultimate. Its Monist eternalism. An extreme. Read with clarity please. Different turnings have different philosophical tenets, all based on inter-dependent co-arising. Sutra display's two truths of relative and ultimate but both are empty so subverts as well, but because Advaita does too, doesn't mean they mean the same thing. They don't. Advaita reifies an ultimate that's more true than the relative which subsumes the relative. Nagarjuna uses emptiness not as an ultimate view... as it say's. "Those who take up emptiness as a view are incurable", he takes it up as a way to explain dependent origination, how things are ultimately empty of self existence, but he goes further in saying that this is also empty. Thus, the emptiness of emptiness. To elucidate the point further... So it's a sideways view that cuts through never stating a rooftop or a foundation. Thus, the end experience is also different as well as the handling of the state of bliss and it's compassionate activity. Advaitin is still top down philosophy and reification of experience, where Nirguna Brahman is ultimate and all else is superimposed over this ultimate ground of existence, everything is one with this and as you said a single mind stream. Buddhism does not agree with this interpretation of experience and experiences deeper, empties totally, yet not as an ultimate, things don't arise but don't stop. Thus also subverting the two truths because there is no distinction between the ultimate and the relative in pure and total awareness that is the experience of liberation. Though Buddhas have separate and distinct mind streams, their realization is the same and also they are empty of inherent existence, not as an ultimate view, but as a realization of dependent origination. Buddhism never say's that all there is, is emptiness. Read above. Advaitin's still don't understand how Samsara works and don't see that karma goes deeper than concept. Advaitins hide in the non-conceptual view and call it an ultimate view. Nagarjuna and the Buddha pacifies this view as well leading to a different experience of self and cosmos than the Advaitin. There is no emptiness, there is only, inter-dependent-co-origination. You are still thinking that dependent origination means superimposition over an ultimate truth. That's exactly what it's NOT saying, and what it's actually subverting. It's a sideways view, not literally, but poetically speaking, because infinite regress/progress goes in infinite direction, both in and out, up and down... etc. It's deep in your reification of conceptualess experience of samadhi and philosophy. A non-phenomenal phenomena. I'm using words obviously where words don't reach. No... it's view and method. View is more important than method until view is comprehended, then method is more important than view. One practices both at the same time though, as view is also method and method is view. But both are empty of inherent existence and interdependent. The opposite is also phenomena and dependent on the first. Thus the quote above of Nagarjuna's philosophy. There's no essence, just view. They are different in realization. One reifies a non-conceptual ground then superimposes, the other empties everything, even emptiness but not as a reified ultimate view, just as a conventional to give rise to how one should meditate on freedom from proliferation and see directly dependent origination, even in deep states of formless conceptual free meditation. The attachment in Vedanta is extremely subtle.

It's a poetic way of putting things. Samsara is what everyone experiences even Gods except Buddhas and Buddhas attain Buddhahood through comprehension of dependent origination. You can meditate in a cave for centuries and attain high states of consciousness, but without the view of Buddhadharma, no liberation. The 1st of the noble 8 fold path is... "Right View" and the Buddha is very specific about what this means. It does not mean take refuge in a conceptual-less state of mind. Yes, I love discussion! I'm gaining clarity and insight which if you really want to know the Dharma you engage in it's discussion. If you just want to know the place of no thought, then you go to a formless realm and reify it thinking this is it, such bliss. But, that's not Buddhadharma.

You are only controlling your individually infinite mind streams intermingled manifestation. You are not controlling mine. When awareness gets subtler than density, or 5 sense expression, it influences with more power. Like a trickling river running over a stone in early spring finally gets the stone rolling when the snow on the mountain finally fully melts after a long winter and turns the trickle into a great avalanche of water. Which is why great masters can only manifest great super natural powers in front of those who's mind streams have intense mingling with the masters mind stream. The universe is more complex than oneness and more simple than manyness. Niether should be reified. I talk to my future enlightened conventional self sometimes... does that make me enlightened in the conventional now? No... only a stream enterer... maybe once or twice returner. Maybe this lifetime too?? It does have my current face! Anyway... try to be more objective about your experiences and read more Buddhist scripture, it will contextualize your experiences differently. Start Pali though... I recommend at least.

The mind is deeper than what consciously manifests in any given incarnation. The child still has latent karmas that manifest eventually, so no... the possibility of suffering has not been extinguished, for the seeds are just latent in the child to manifest as the karmic incarnation unravels. They are closer to Buddhahood only in a kind of ignorance is bliss, not a complete wisdom is bliss sense. Yes, before Tibetans lost Tibet, the Tibetans used to war with old China before Padmasambhava disarmed Tibet through Buddhism. No problem, it was expected and seen to happen by various Buddhist Masters who are beyond karma anyway and never lost their state regardless, but tried to warn, because nothing is engraved in stone and can be transformed through transformation of awareness, by understanding deeply. Also... the term Lamaism is really not quite correct. Tibetan Buddhism is Vajrayana which existed in India and has NOT changed it's way of expression other than in merging in various Tibetan dressings over time. Yes, it evolved, but through the same standard of scrutiny and deep meditation. Vajrayana found it's protection in the Himalayas after the Muslims destroyed most of it in India. It proliferated very well and very pure in Tibet for the most part. Remember, there was no mass media to distract Tibetans from practicing the Vajrayana Buddhadharma. It's sooo pure through various lineages. Not perfect in the conventional sense, but is through various lineages that are linked directly to the Buddha. No... the original stuff is Vajrayana from India. Bonpo was found to be the last vestiges of the previous Buddha before Shakyamuni. Your interpretation needs more education and anthropology. Bonpo was always non-theistic and had already stable beliefs that were quite akin to Buddhist view. It just needed re-clarification. The Buddha manifested the first truly organized monastic tradition in the world, in India. Tibetan Buddhism is hardly influenced by anything much Persian. As even the Buddha never bowed to the Vedas which is arguably from the Persian invasion of India. Though some do not concur. Oh yes, of course, but Dzogchen is not different from the first statement of the Buddha. Mahamudra has the same realization and leads to the Jalus or rainbow body as well. Hey... we're on earth.. not a Buddha realm, conventionally speaking.

Everyone wants to hide behind the non-conceptual view it seems and not investigate deeper? Like I said, the Buddha said that Karma penetrates into the non-conceptual experience. I have found this to be true, because once I realized this, a whole other universe of karmas manifested through the light of investigation, directly out of the formless non-conceptual realms of my own infinite mind stream. Man! I thought I was sooo close too... then I realized that I was just hiding a seed for a new ignorant manifestation in the next universe. This seed en-lodges very deep and just continues to reify, reify, reify from the non-conceptual ground of reality... so subtle attachment keeps saying. The cause of Theist and Monist interpretations. All eternalist views... All Samsaric! Not the middle way of Buddhadharma. Buddhadharma means... "The way of awakening" "The way" is just naming the Samsaric flow and doesn't necessarily fully dismantle it for oneself.

Everyone wants to hide behind the non-conceptual view it seems and not investigate deeper? Like I said, the Buddha said that Karma penetrates into the non-conceptual experience. I have found this to be true, because once I realized this, a whole other universe of karmas manifested through the light of investigation, directly out of the formless non-conceptual realms of my own infinite mind stream. Man! I thought I was sooo close too... then I realized that I was just hiding a seed for a new ignorant manifestation in the next universe. This seed en-lodges very deep and just continues to reify, reify, reify from the non-conceptual ground of reality... so subtle attachment keeps saying. The cause of Theist and Monist interpretations. All Samsaric!

I agree, he needs to check his intentions and their purity.

You should read more Pali Suttas. Yes, clan of the Shakya's, but his teachings had not much to do with the Srimadbhagavatam, which I've read. The Buddha scrutinized and criticized the Vedas intensely and never bowed down to them as a supreme teaching. He felt they were Samsaric teachings. Teachings on the recycling of Samsara, not the teachings on the liberation from Samsara. The other stuff seems cool, but your reading into things without the education of the Pali Suttas.

Beyond name and form but experientially reified. Still a subtle it that all things are. Buddhist realization is still subtler. No, that's eternalism. A Self existing eternal Self of all. D.O. is beginningless and endless but only in a relative sense, not in an ultimate sense. Buddhahood is a realization, not a substratum. Still different realization. Very good! Hi!

Yes, I literally see lots of things, including the different colors of the elements as if everything was just a rainbow emanating from light, coagulating into seeming forms. Still D.O.E. No, I at times can see right through "it's" and my own existence. I am not the soul of anything, but my consciousness can intermingle through the chain of connectivity and influence. I can't liberate you, but merely influence you. The same goes for you to me. Thus no single mindstream. Samsara is inherent. Liberation is dependently originated. The masses will not attain liberation in this kalpa. Most spiritual beings will go to higher re-births. Light is intelligent? Light just shines, but D.O. is the infinite web of action, relatively. As well as omnipotent. Shaivism still feels that only Shiva has the power of Universal creation. Shaivism sets up a primal cause of the relative, then subsumes it saying it's all one with the substratum. That's just the interpretation of the Jhanic experience as ultimate. Still not seeing D.O. Yes, I know of the Spanda Karikas and have experienced Spanda directly for elongated periods of time and can get there though mantra at any moment. Still, that's just the conscious experience of D.O. pulse. Don't reify. Yes, they did and I felt Kaula was deeper. Abhinavagupta was quite the genius, but not as smart as Nagarjuna and Buddha, or Padhmasambhava in my opinion, thus he missed the boat. Stay giggly!!