Vajrahridaya

Kundalini transforms to become I would think is synonymous with shen level awareness as it raises up the shashumna nadi from the base level of Jing. Either that or it's all three coming together, which might be more likely what it is, Jing, Qi and Shen coming together in the shashumna nadi transforming and purifying each other?

Interesting, and well said, but it's not very Buddhist, nor Taoist to gripe about what has already happened. I also don't think it's all as negative as it's been stated here. As a seeker of the truth won't be fooled by metaphors taken literally by a pliable majority, and go for the gist or the marrow of a particular body of teaching and toss the gristle. What I'd like to see is a positive integration and sharing of ideas. Why not? We can all learn from each other and take the positive and leave the negative. This is an age of cross culturalism. It can be a very good thing.

Yogis (Meditators) of all traditions attain this. Even controversial figures such as Muktananda attained this chest warmth and elongated after death body elasticity. Famous yogis' in the Hindu tradition are not cremated. They are buried in full lotus and a Mahasamadhi shrine is built around them and the energy in these shrines are very powerful as the body of great yogis buried beneath the temple emanate this continuous presence.

I would say the purpose of nature is merely change, and that's it. Transformation. You make of it what you will. Your personal interpretation of the fact of change is yours alone to do.

Unless it's for the benefit of others. The Buddha certainly did not avoid recognition.

How to determine if someone is enlightened? Sneak behind that person, and if the person doesn't feel you, finger pop the person in the back of the ear and see how the person reacts.

Love the Starwars reference!

The Tibetans do. The women are allowed to marry multiple men, and the whole family shares in the responsibility of raising a child. The marrying of multiple men many times has to do with land, but sometimes with shared love too. At least so I've read.

Good synopsis that I've seen to be true as well. It's interesting that since women have entered the male work force, they're rate of cancer and other diseases have increased.

There is, being obsessed though... eh. There is a difference between a feeling of great respect and straight up obsession. Isn't there? Anyway... I'm also a work in progress my brother. Maybe someday we'll be old dead guys that people quote as inspiration? Not that this is a goal... but, alas, if we haven't helped inspire someone besides ourself in a positive way, what use is our life?

That's the attitude of a seeker, someone who doesn't accept it just because it's well known, or many people say that it's true. This is very good.

Emptiness ralis, the emptiness of things, the direct cognition of it's emptiness, thus it's luminosity as well. This has to be experienced. No amount of blah, blah, blah is going to help you understand, obviously. I'm not talking about the multiple layers of surface nature, or the objects manifest nature, but it's unborn nature. The factor of an object of consciousness that allows for the inward experience of liberation while in activity. I'm talking Buddhism here, not quantum physics.

The key cosmology is the same, the key teachings are the same, but the clothing is different. Those who disparage? I'm not interested in so much. Of course there are schools which I wouldn't agree with or interpretations that I don't agree with. But, that doesn't mean they are completely wrong, just incomplete in view in my opinion. You flounder around the surface too much ralis. There is no point debating with you... there never has been. I just hope others reading this aren't ensnared by your bitter misperception of Buddhism. LOL! Wow... paranoid. Your personal version of critical analysis protects your fear. Trance my ass. I use DO.E in all sorts of contexts. Other people read my stuff other than yourself, and some people just read one post. I get plenty of pm's talking about this, letting me know these things. Some people read it by coming here from google, as a post of mine has come up in the google search engine when they put in the key words inter-dependent origination and emptiness or interdependent origination/emptiness or any other common Buddhist terms that I use, or even phrases. All the different ways I say it are for the sake of real seekers of the meaning of Buddhist phraseology, not for you ralis, but for seekers. Not people who think they already know Buddhism through and through and dismiss it as you do. I'm sorry to disappoint you.

The Buddha was only the first Buddha of this era, but there have been millions since him. Many of the commentaries are written by Buddhas throughout the last 2,500 years, others are not. Gotama was a SamyakasamBuddha or a wheel turning Buddha, and all others since him are SravakaBuddhas, buddhas through listening. The state of mind for these different Buddhas is the same, but the activity is different. But yes, basically, his teaching is pure, but he still debated because other peoples perception of his teachings were not pure. Other Buddhas since him have pure cognition as well but also debated with those who weren't able to perceive the inner meaning of the teaching. So in order to clarify the meaning for them, elaboration and debate is necessary, some get it, most do not, it's Kali Yuga. Buddhahood is no more obscurations to perception of phenomena within the range of the individuals perception. As in, there is no more mis-cognition of the nature of ones self, so there is no more psychological suffering caused by misperception of ones own nature. This does not make a Buddha omnipotent, only omniscient about the nature of phenomena, not that a Buddha knows all things at once. I recall talking about this with you before. But basically, "To know one thing thoroughly, is to know all things." As far as their inner most nature goes. Experiencing Rigpa means having an experience of the Dharmakaya. If you haven't experienced the Dharmakaya, you have not experienced Rigpa.

I'm not interested in these interpretations. I am into Buddhist phenomenology. Mis-cognition or misperception is widely used in such circles. You can do a google search of misperception or mis-cognition and Buddhism... like this... misperception buddhism or this... mis-cognition buddhism You will find all sorts of references.

I deal with too many ghosts, ghosts that have been seen by other people as well to believe otherwise. For me, rebirth and multiple dimensions are as real as the sun in the sky, the moon at night and this computer I type upon right now... all inter-dependent, empty, but relatively real none the less. Meditation experiences consisting of de-conditioning my multilayers of physical identity, arriving at places which I later find were spoken about by Masters of antiquity, all give me cause to believe and not have doubt about what the Masters have said. I doubt my doubt, but I don't doubt the teachings of the Masters I find an intimate connection with.

The use of metaphor is beyond you I guess? Of course there is no literal ocean of Samsara. Samsara is defined as merely the mis-cognition of the moment, leading to actions that reflect this ignorance, leading to realms where there is a majority of the effects caused by the actions of ignorance. Due to the Earths friction, it is mostly the effect of ignorant actions, but also the effect of beautiful thoughts and actions as well. There are higher, "more perfect" realms. I use the term "perfect" relatively, so please. Your problem, much like ralis, is that you read into my statements what you wish to see in order to make yourself seem right. You completely misunderstood the intent of my first couple posts here and just rambled on based upon this initial mis-cognition. Like I said... What you're not seeing is the paradox I am explaining to you. Which is this; the more attached one becomes to the Buddhas teaching, the less attached one is to a "self" that attaches to the thought that there is a teaching to be attached to, to begin with. Or the thinking and attachment that there is a "self" that can even take refuge to begin with. The Buddhas teaching, though structured, clear and straight forward, is like a mirage that teaches the nature of all other mirages. But, since reality is all just mirages and relativity anyway, without an ultimate self standing nature, it is the ultimate mirage as it shows you your own mirage-ness as well as it's own while you are viewing it. As well, it's so good and clear, that once you yourself have seen everything for what it all is, it's a mirage that you hone and master in order to show others. Buddhadharma is not a teaching you burn, or kill. What one kills is ones own pre-conceptions concerning the teaching as well as oneself. The dharma itself as a raft is still worth carrying around, but as a gift to others, not as a form of bondage.

You are showing your lack of experience here. You probably never really engaged in chanting, you were too busy being critical of it for your mind to become calm, focused and open. p.s. I see you typing again, are you seriously going to ruin this thread with your incessant barking? Steve and I had a nice and open debate, making points and debating them and being calm about the result of having different view points. You should learn from him.

On a more serious note... You're absolutely right, I don't agree that every single belief system results in Buddhahood. Or that every Cosmology is reflective of a Buddhas Cosmology. Neither did the Buddha, neither did Nagarjuna and other historical Buddhas, and neither does Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche. Shankaracharya, the guy who popularized Advaita Vedanta didn't believe Buddhism resulted in enlightenment. Buddhism doesn't agree that Advaita Vedantas methods and philosophy are reflective of Buddhahood. The Dalai Lama says the same thing, very quietly in only very few books. He says that it's a Brahma Yoga, leading to rebirth in long lived God realms. Why does he say that? Because it's reflective of his realization, as well as what the Buddha taught. I'm sorry that I don't join your party that states that all paths are one, or come from one self existing grand source and return to one self existing grand source. Am I allowed to have a different belief than you? Or, are you going to continually chase me around and bark at me every time I say something you don't agree with?

Also, I meant that he is his teachings, that the historical Buddha is not as important as his teaching, the path that he shared, the methods of the Buddha. In that sense, he is alive and well.

Well, there are two death stories... I don't know which one is true? There are also two birth stories as well. One states that it was a virgin birth and the other not. I think the whole virgin birth idea was a reinvention due to Christian influence? But, that was only his body that died. Come on Stig... as a spiritual taoist, you know that this life in the physical body on Earth is not all a mind stream has to look forward to! Don't you? Anyway... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha "According to the Mahaparinibbana Sutta of the Pali canon, at the age of 80, the Buddha announced that he would soon reach Parinirvana, or the final deathless state, and abandon his earthly body. After this, the Buddha ate his last meal, which he had received as an offering from a blacksmith named Cunda. Falling violently ill, Buddha instructed his attendant Ānanda to convince Cunda that the meal eaten at his place had nothing to do with his passing and that his meal would be a source of the greatest merit as it provided the last meal for a Buddha. Mettanando and von Hinüber argue that the Buddha died of mesenteric infarction, a symptom of old age, rather than food poisoning. The precise contents of the Buddha's final meal are not clear, due to variant scriptural traditions and ambiguity over the translation of certain significant terms; the Theravada tradition generally believes that the Buddha was offered some kind of pork, while the Mahayana tradition believes that the Buddha consumed some sort of truffle or other mushroom. These may reflect the different traditional views on Buddhist vegetarianism and the precepts for monks and nuns." Oh, and also Stig... He's not worm food... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relic "In Buddhism, relics of the Buddha and various sages are venerated. After the Buddha's death, his remains were divided into eight portions. Afterward, these relics were enshrined in stupas wherever Buddhism was spread, despite his instructions that relics were not to be collected or venerated. Some relics believed to be original cereal of Buddha still survive including the much revered Sacred Relic of the tooth of the Buddha in Sri Lanka. A stupa is a building created specifically for the relics. Many Buddhist temples have stupas and historically, the placement of relics in a stupa often became the initial structure around which the whole temple would be based. Today, many stupas also hold the ashes or ringsel of prominent/respected Buddhists who were cremated. In rare cases the whole body is conserved, for example in the case of Dudjom Rinpoche, after his death his physical body was moved a year later from France and placed in a stupa in one of his main monasteries near Boudhanath, Nepal in 1988. Pilgrims may view his body through a glass window in the stupa. The Buddha's relics are considered to show people that enlightenment is possible, to remind them that the Buddha was a real person, and to also promote good virtue."

ahahaha! Nothing like a hot women pooping with the door open for me to accidently see! YES! I'm just as sick as you Zhang!!

Brilliant, and simply stated. Wonderful! If you do have time at some point to dig... I'd be interested myself! p.s. I like how sometimes we are writing at the same time, and then I post and see that we say the same thing, except I'm long winded and you are simple and concise in your statements. I bow to that in you dear Vajra bro. I think it's a sign that you've digested the teachings more than me. Ok sorry everyone, gushing praise rant finished.