Vajrahridaya

Yeah.. floors the heck out of me too... I mean really deeply. It's concept shattering, all the ramifications of it and all, on an experiential level. Floored me when I had the Eureka about it.

Indeed. Hmmm...

Buddha insight is not a belief for me. Thanks for the love though.

Wow, that's insightful! Yes, I'm not convinced of the gene theory either, even if so, it's still my own creation as this life is the result of previous lives anyway. So, I'm not really trying to use that as an excuse. Mind over matter... Mind is matter! Anyway... thanks for this insight Cat.

It has not been proven either way empirically or scientifically. But, you can have the insight yourself, directly through meditative investigation.

Kind of extreme... wouldn't you say? From this definition, one could then say that Buddhism is evil. :lol:

You're right, and it has, there are plenty of books out there that talk about more powers available to a being developing on the spiritual path. I've read plenty of them, from the Christian mystic tradition, the Sufi tradition to even the Taoist. Wang Liping talks about different powers in Opening the Dragons Gate.

Oh it is amaaaaazing stuff. Truly such great treasures. Such incredible teachings from the highest peaks on the planet! Yes yes... so yes!! I'm drunk right now... but I didn't drink a thing! Thanks for reminding me! Yes... Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche... I really connected to him through his Autobiography, what an amazing and humble man! What precious teachers many of these Rinpoches are. These are the Rinpoches I think about when I think of Vajrayana and Dzogchen. These that represented with full illumination!

I see, so your entire interpretation of me is based upon the fear instilled into you during past lives. That does make sense. To compare the teachings of the Buddha to Christian conquests paved in murder, is reflective of your own state of mind concerning religion in general, which is strongly conditioned by Western Monotheism. You are really saying more about where you are at than where I am at. My intentions are far removed from those that you are associating me with. It seems that you have a brother in ralis when it comes to this. Who says I'm trying to convert anybody? I'm sharing my view and experience for the fun of it, and you guys have so many buttons... really. Yes, everyone says all this, but I'm just saying, the Buddha did actually teach a religion, Buddhism was not a later development that came about after he died. He created an order of monks and he created an order of nuns, as well as the practices and contemplations that lead to being a Buddha, just like him. Did Jesus do that? Jesus was cool, but he didn't really teach with a lot of clarity, at least not to a whole lot of people. Maybe he did to some Essenes? But, we don't really know for sure and we don't really have a clear picture of what he taught. So yes, I am Buddhist, and I am going to speak from the Buddhist view of things, always, because it's complete, clear, deep, subtle, refined, grounded, also transcendent at the same time. I'm not trying to convert you, I'm just sharing... I think it's your fear taking control of you, some deep seeds possibly from what you just mentioned concerning some past life karma.

This is wise. But, that doesn't take away from CC's personal karma and personal intentions behind doing what he did. If people walk away with the good and feel inspired, that is talking more towards where these inspired people are coming from and their karmas, having nothing to do with what kind of future CC might have... simply based upon his hidden intentions for fame and glory... maybe? I'm assuming here. I don't know really. But to claim for so long that something is real and grounded in this material world as a truth that they experienced, but then we all find out that it was all a fabrication, much of it based upon a collection of information made of truths... is none the less molded into lies, will effect the person who made such claims. I wouldn't want his afterlife, then again, that too is complicated and not linear, so who knows? He might have made amends on his death bed? I'm not judging him. He is his only judge. He could be sitting high in a cloud right now, laughing about the multifarious display of karmic occurrences? I don't feel very connected to him, so I couldn't tell ya.

Thanks cat, I appreciate that. I feel the same about your posts. May God bless you! What I mean by that is, may your beginning-less stream of karmas see the light of awareness illumined emptiness! The quote that you can't see is: "Since everything is but an apparition, having nothing to do with good or bad, acceptance or rejection, one may well burst out in laughter" -Longchenpa

You're so sweet. Seriously... you really are. A sweety! You're not bad at all!

Hey, you are welcome to your dogma and interpretation of spirituality. As am I. You consider the non-conceptual as ground of being. I do not. I come from a perspective that differs from yours. That should be ok. I don't find your view to be complete, as you don't find mine to be. I'm ok to disagree. I don't follow these types of teachings anymore. I see where they lead, they are nice, and give you that gushy feeling, but it's not the same realization as Buddhadharma, and that is the path I follow, and thus I have a different insight, arising dependent upon a different level of experience. For me, and plenty of others, it's deeper, subtler and more refined. You don't think so. So what? Me too in this lifetime and have had the great good fortune of having met some very highly realized beings of different traditions. I am not denying the power and luminosity of all traditions, as most traditions are a training ground that teach the 4 immeasurables, the infinitude of the 4 great virtues. I found that the Buddhadharma teaches more clearly, is more practical, goes that extra little bit deeper that makes a whole lot of difference. I just share from my own experience, as you do from yours. Hey! How wonderful! I still disagree with your take on things though.

What's wrong with your creative bone? I was expanding the meaning to make a point. I just redirected what you said to me to the source of it.

You believe based upon the authority of your experience and intelligence that you are right and that what the Buddha taught is just a bunch of made up beliefs and myth. You think that based upon the "fact" that you are right and the "fact" that I am wrong, your view is separate from mine and the Buddhas view as well as more in line with the "truth" as you see it. Because of this fact, you are part of a sect of people that agrees with you that disagrees with the sect of people that agree with me. Your view is limited based upon this criteria so your mind does not reference experience beyond this in order to see past your prejudice concerning me. So you have a mental and experiential dogma limiting your interpretation of the things I say. So much in this room is said based upon peoples spiritual experience that transcends the senses which cannot be verified by modern science, which is why I'm here. You want everything to be framed in scientific fact? Which is constantly changing? All this proves that you are quite dogmatic, sectarian and authoritarian, Ralis. You are a victim of the 5 senses that is in general considered to be the basis for knowing the "truth", and this is a popular myth adhered to by the ignorant masses. Take a deeper look at yourself.

Buddha isn't above it all, he just sees through it all. He doesn't need to start wars to prove that either. Ralis, your view and interpretation of everything I say is so skewed and really just a product of conditioning from hating Christianity.

I agree, even the gods fight in the heavens for who is the real form of the transcendent first cause. I guess all the theistic wars waged on Earth is just a reflection of that. "My God is the true God of all", "No mine is the one and only God of them all." Then there's the "My God is the god of all gods, the formless one that is the source of all other gods."... Anyway... I'm just saying that I agree.

Chogyam Trungpa was a highly developed master and Bodhisattva, but still was an alcoholic. It didn't stop him from connecting to people during lucid dream states and revealing various super-natural powers of perception, and it didn't stop him from giving initiations into the Vajra path. But, non-the-less... he was an alcoholic which sometimes ended him up in situations that revealed that he was not a Buddha, just a very developed Buddhist. I think Alcoholism is deeply hereditary and physically chemical... like an allergy. I'm not nearly as developed as Chogyam Trungpa, and I am seeing that the choices I've made while being drunk are different from the choices I would make otherwise. Many times, these choices have gotten me into very interesting, and developing of my inner state type of situations. But, as of late, this is just not so, it seems that the time for that is over. The situations that are occurring as of late, are more and more destructive and not nearly as constructive as they used to be. It's also getting in the way of my practice, more and more. So... I think this is a very personal experience and everyone has their process. I appreciate your insight though... as I do agree with the intent of what you are saying, very much so! But, I have to have my own process.

Ulises, Actually, your comments reveal your dogma. The all is one dogma, the all paths come from and lead to the same place dogma. The dogma of "the non-conceptual" is the ground of being transcending all. I also used to think this transcended dogmas, but then I had a realization, a Eureka revealing how dogmatic and imperialistic I was being. As if it couldn't be true that there are in fact different levels of realization and different types of insights into the nature of things that lead to different interpretations of the nature of "enlightenment" and "liberation?" According to Buddhism, there is no ultimate truth, just relative truth, and that's Buddhisms ultimate truth. P.S. What I'm saying is that, there are different insights, different outcomes to different approaches. I really don't care what this person realized, it's not in line with the teaching of the Buddha. I'm not sectarian, I'm just pragmatic. There are differences, both relative and ultimate between different spiritual traditions that lead to different spiritual outcomes, though generally subtle, they are important differences. What this person is talking about is the luminosity, discussed and experienced by all major spiritual traditions, but not emptiness, which is the kicker that etches Buddhism out of the Universalism and Imperialism of all paths lead to and come from an ultimate and transcending "one" of all.

I would have been interested to read what "Suninmyeyes" had to say. Que sera sera.

Thanks guys. I want to be how I was without it again, so much clearer. So, I'm going to do that and get the support I need in order to do so. I think AA as a peer support group is good, even though I will of course re-interpret their spiritual premise from within. I do want to try the 12 step program. I'm willing to do anything that will evolve me.

How very Hindu. There's no ultimate reality according to Buddha insight, only ultimate insight into reality, so I guess we opt out of the interpretation above taken directly from the old Hindu metaphor of the Elephant and the blind men. Teaching that somehow the non-conceptual transcends the conceptual and is higher, better, more ultimate, is dualistic and merely leads to high level formless samadhi, which may feel like liberation to many, but is not. To read what I just said above may not really make sense until it's experienced directly. I've experienced directly the level of interpretation that you are pushing as the ultimate truth above. Then I was introduced to the Buddhas teaching, first as an experiment because I really wanted to know if what the Buddhists were saying was true, that he did teach a different view of reality. Because I was willing to let go of my assumptions and attachment to experiences interpreted as proof of this ultimate reality beyond concepts, I was open enough to have some glimpses of what the Buddha was talking about with his teachings on dependent origination. The state of the non-conceptual or formless state of mind arises just as dependently as the conceptual and is equally empty of inherent existence and is not a transcendent ground of being but is rather just another part of Samsara that most people are not conscious of. Edited for clarity.

Sure bob... Your interpretation and your justification of it.

I'm really getting a lot out of this thread as I think I might be an alcoholic. I'm trying to figure out what it is? In my life, I'll quit for a few years, but it becomes extreme, like I don't socialize at all, I lock myself up at home and work and become somewhat anti-social. I will go to spiritual retreats and yoga class, but most everyone even at these places has a drink or two at night or during dinner parties, or during birthdays so I can't really socialize with them either if I'm in a not drinking phase. So, it seems I can't get away from being around it socially and when I have one drink it's like there is a dimensional shift in my consciousness and I feel it. I have lots of fun, I enjoy it, but then there's a point where I go from enjoyment to self destruction. Then my spiritual practice starts falling away and my lucid dreaming practice suffers and my meditations suffer and get dulled down, etc. I'm a happy drunk, but then sometimes it gets out of hand and sometimes it gets really out of hand. What is it in us, is it just chemical, is it completely mental, is it both. Probably both. But, supposedly it's hereditary, as my fathers father was an alcoholic. I'm trying to understand? What makes us different from those that can have a couple drinks every once in a while?