Vajrahridaya

Then the Buddha was wrong to debate with Mahavira about the incomplete view of Jainism, and he was wrong when he denied the Vedic/Theist vehicle as leading to Buddhahood? Because that's what he did and he was either wrong or right. It's up to you to decide of course, for yourself. But if you think he's wrong, then Buddhism is lower than Vedanta, and if he is right, than Buddhism is a much clearer vehicle than Vedanta. In this debate, there is no middle ground, other than ignoring the facts. Hindu scholars in India have accepted that the Buddha teaches something different from Vedanta, on an ultimate level, and thus they reject the Buddhas teachings, just like Shankaracharya and Aurobindo did. How can you justify the universality of all vehicles when their conclusions on liberation and the ultimate nature of things is entirely different?

Really? We have to stick with his perspective? Ok then...

Well, I am a staunch supporter of true Taoist lineages that lead to Buddhahood. As I feel there are plenty out there. I just come from a Vajrayana/Dzogchen/Buddhist lineage so talk with that language. I think Taoism and Buddhism are compatible. I don't think that all peoples ideas of Taoism are compatible, just like I don't think all peoples ideas of Buddhism are compatible with Buddhism, but are just their own mis-understandings. I agree. Which is a matter of awareness de-mystifying the phenomena. I agree, on all points stated. Which is why this board should not be a persons only source of any type of information. One should investigate from many angles and from many points or places of reference. These boards can be somewhat Chaotic, with all the different view points. People have to find what's true for them in the now and what will help them now, which will evolve.

That idea is not in line with the Buddhas teaching. There are lots of stupid people in the world, and plenty of them got a hold of the Buddhist teachings and skewered them, then taught these misunderstandings to other people. In my tradition of Buddhism, there are tons of Women Buddhas and tons of teachings from women Buddhas. I practice a few of the practices given by these Women Buddhas. So, who are you to believe? Someone who's actually studied the teachings and put them into practice or people who haven't really gone deeply into the teachings and hasn't put them into practice? I don't believe these teachings are Buddhist at all. The Buddha wouldn't have made an order of Nuns if he didn't think that women could realize Buddhahood. There is also a story in Tibet, that comes from North India when Padmasambhava, the Buddha who brought Buddhism to Tibet, was alive. He had a student who was a female, and in her meditation she went to a heaven realm, and in this realm there was a monk who meditated his way up there as well. He said to her, "Hey, you can't become a Buddha, you have to become a man first." She then through her yogic power, transformed into a man right before his eyes and said, "What's the difference? Is there really an ultimate difference between a man and a women?" She then turned back into her form as a women and said, "As long as you are aware, you can become a Buddha, as this does not depend upon your sex." Sexism appears in every tradition due to general human ignorance, not that it's natural to be ignorant, but that most humans have been ignorant and are ignorant to this day. I think you guys should look more at why you are clinging to these negative views more than you would open up to positive views? It's interesting how most humans hear negative rumors or read mis-teachings and mis-representations of originally positive things and people, then hold on tightly to this mis-contextualization and misunderstandings, as if they were the ultimate truth? I'm here, sharing positive views, based upon far more investigation and study than you guys and instead I'm getting hit with negative propaganda coming from... what state of mind? Think of where you are coming from within you in sharing this mis-information? With that, you can have it, if you think it's true, but it's not Buddhism.

This is from the perspective of renunciation as he was a Monk, talking to other Monks. Nagarjuna say's the same thing about his own body and the talk by the Dalai Lama is much longer and more nuanced than what you just quoted. That is just a view meant to lead one to delve into the body's nature instead of being ignorant about it. As that is just one aspect of the body, food comes in, shit comes out... it dies, it's nothing but bone, what is really this "I"? It's a certain perspective. Nagarjuna also talks about how Buddhahood is in the body, liberation is in the body and how wonderful the body is as a vehicle for liberation. It's really your view, taking this reading completely out of context. I really don't care what these people are saying, they are coming from an ignorant perspective, taking this and that out of context, due to fear, and completely missing the point. The vast corpus of Buddhist teachings touch upon many different perspectives meant for different people at different junctions in their lives in order to help them dive deeper. The Dalai Lama has a heart practice and it's Dzogchen. "According to Tibetan Buddhism and Bön, Dzogchen is the natural, primordial state or natural condition of the mind, and a body of teachings and meditation practices aimed at realizing that condition. Dzogchen, or "Great Perfection", is a central teaching of the Nyingma school also practiced by adherents of other Tibetan Buddhist sects. According to Dzogchen literature, Dzogchen is the highest and most definitive path to enlightenment.[1] From the perspective of Dzogchen, the ultimate nature of all sentient beings is said to be pure, all-encompassing, primordial awareness or naturally occurring timeless awareness. This "intrinsic awareness" has no form of its own and yet is capable of perceiving, experiencing, reflecting, or expressing all form. It does so without being affected by those forms in any ultimate, permanent way. This pristine awareness is what Dzogchenpas refer to as rigpa. The analogy given by Dzogchen masters is that one's nature is like a mirror which reflects with complete openness but is not affected by the reflections, or like a crystal ball that takes on the colour of the material on which it is placed without itself being changed. In the practice of Dzogchen one is not distracted by thoughts, i.e. one does not let thoughts lead onself. This allows thoughts to naturally self-liberate without avoidance." "The word Dzogchen has been translated variously as Great Perfection, Great Completeness, Total Completeness, and Supercompleteness. These terms also convey the idea that our nature as intrinsic awareness has many qualities that make it perfect. These include indestructibility, incorruptible purity, non-discriminating openness, flawless clarity, profound simplicity, all-pervading presence and equality within all beings (i.e., the quality, quantity and functionality of this awareness is exactly the same in every being in the universe). It is said that the impressive personal qualities of the fully enlightened Buddha derived from the fact that he was fully aligned with this already-existing primordial nature. (Which is the positive direct awareness of the constant and always empty nature of all arisings) Descriptions of a Buddha as omniscient and omnipresent refer to their ultimate nature as this awareness. The Tibetan term Dzogchen is sometimes said to be a rendering of the Sanskrit term mahāsandhi,[6] and is also used to render the Sanskrit term ati yoga (primordial yoga).[7]"

I agree.

Well, it's Buddhism really. Just my wording. Ignorance, suffering, that is all really. The Buddha said, "All I teach is the pacification of suffering." Well, if you want bondage? Then definitely ignore me. You don't have to get into the idea of other realms. That just naturally occurs as your meditation progresses. It's really about understanding the causes of why you suffer while on Earth, right now, in the body. The teaching is also about understanding the swings of pleasure and pain. How you might not be suffering during a time of pleasure, but what about when this pleasure ends. His teaching should deepen a persons awareness of change. If for you that does not include the change of before life and after life on a personal level, including multiple dimensions of experiencing your self? That is fine, the practices are really just about grounding your self awareness. For me that also means grounding my awareness of the cosmos and my experiences of other realms of self experience which the Buddha addresses very well. This thread is about Kundalini and it's experience. I have a different view of what Kundalini is than what is being shared here. But it's still about the same phenomena. If you don't like what I have to say, you don't have to read it. You are not the only one here, and there are people who do like what they read from me. It is a perspective that is a radical departure from the norm, so it might be challenging. But none the less, it's valid.

Buddhist yoga is not the same as the Hindu yoga you are probably referring to. Here... Yantra Yoga (Yoga of Movement) Also this one... Yantra Yoga They say it's from Tibet, but it's actually from North India, then preserved in Tibet. This form is much more gentle and more focused on integration in the middle, or the heart. After the Rinpoche talks, there is a show of some of the movements. This form is a much more dynamic form of yoga than hatha with a deeper awareness of the breath in conjunction with the movements. It's fine. It has helped propel you towards a sense of seeking answers about things. It has probably brought up questioning you never thought you knew you had.

That's a complete misrepresentation of the Buddhas teaching. It's propaganda Ulises and not a knowledgeable source for understanding the Buddhas teaching. This entire expose is really just exposing a complete misunderstanding of the Buddhas teachings as well as the fear of it. The Buddhas teaching is incredibly positive and life affirming. You should study the teachings directly. As well as those of the Mahayana, Vajrayana and Dzogchen traditions as well. We do not revolt against matter or wish to transcend anything other than our own ignorance concerning the matter of everything as well as our incessant clinging to a static self or Self of all. Nirvana is not a negative state of being. Nirvana is liberation while living, a "blowing out" of ones ignorance concerning the nature of the universe and the self. Shree Aurobindo is not a good source of Buddhist teaching. He say's, The Buddha "made a mistake, calling away the dynamic side of the liberation." But the teaching of Dependent origination/emptiness is all about dynamism, and constant awareness of change on all levels. Shree Aurobindo reveals how deep the clinging to a static concept of an ultimate reality goes. Shree Aurobindo is a victim of his own mis-interpretation of the Buddhas teaching and is in fact the one who is having a hard time understanding dynamism.

I think A.A. as a peer support group can be very helpful. One doesn't have to personally interpret the concept of a "higher power" as a supreme being of the universe. For me is the Buddhas, bodhisattva's and my own highest potential.

Yes heightened awareness and a deeper experience of ones own karma. This happens when awareness is jarred open by some catalyzing experience, and sometimes it is a drug that does this, or a near death experience, or contact with a highly developed being, saint, wise sage... etc. The ensuing avalanche which you are talking about below is generally considered, "kundalini" that primal feeling, that primal force and intensity! It's really just awareness and karma. Yes, this is exactly what is considered "awakening of the kundalini" and the "wreck" you are experiencing is just the onslaught of unconscious patterns coming to your conscious state of being to a degree that is shocking your state of mind and thus nervous system. This can be helped through proper guidance. I would recommend a Vajrayana Master, or Dzogchen Master, who can prescribe yogic techniques in order to help ground your experience of this new level of awareness without reifying and deifying a mystical "agent" behind it all. Where do you live? Not all that carry the name of Rinpoche are worthy of the name. You might want to start a practice of Tai Chi and if there is a good Taoist Master around, that could be good too, if he/she is a Master that is. But, Yoga or some sort of Chi practice under the guidance of an adept would be most advisable!

We're the creator, that's right, inter-dependently. So there isn't a "one" consciousness behind it. The thing is, is that I am so called "kundalini" active with all the classical experiences, and I used to have the same interpretation of it as you did... conditioned by theistic concepts with experiential interpretation revolving around theistic premise. When I started to have the 3rd eye experiences revolving around the contemplation of dependent origination/emptiness with the insights revealing perception past the theistic dimension of experience... There was no reconciliation between the two. I started to truly understand what the Buddha taught, and how entirely different of a realization it is from the level of "oneness" that reabsorbs and expresses Samsara, recycling all of us sentient beings, from the lower realms to the higher realms. The experience of oneness is the experience of one's awareness expanding, but identifying that "WOW" and very powerful experience with a higher Self, or grand Self of all is just another revelation of the personal clinging to an identity, or Self of all. This is a deeply rooted tendency that is the root of our revolving between lower and higher realms since time without beginning. Manitou, What you're experiencing now is just the upswing, from Nihilism to Eternalism. Because you haven't really studied the Buddhas teachings directly and at length as he is the single biggest teacher of a particular spiritual tradition known to man as he actually taught the tradition associated with him and it wasn't a later development by other more ignorant beings like Christianity for instance. You might not understand the subtlety of his intention or realization? But he went through all those experiences that you are talking about and that level of absorption in meditation and interpretation that reifies these experiences as proof of an ultimate "consciousness." He then stepped back and realized it was an incomplete view by questioning deeper and discarded the Vedic and Theistic interpretation of it all which he grew up with, as lacking in direct insight into what is really going on and went deeper! When he talks about the 8 jhanas including the 4 formless jhanas or meditative Samadhi's of "infinite space", "infinite consciousness", "infinite nothingness", "neither perception nor non-perception." These are deeply refined states of consciousness that most people never, become conscious of as a personal potential. When people do have a glimpse of one of these states of consciousness, they have a tendency to make one or another of them the ultimate "source of being", then tell everyone and create a tradition around it. I.E. Jesus, A.A., Islam... and other such versions of Monotheism. Generally the God that they saw is just one of the long lived God's or Goddess's that were first born at the big bang, who mistakenly thought that everything that came after one or the other depending on the dimension of that God, was actually coming from "His" or "Her" own being. So these God's teach different versions of theism saying that it all comes from "The Almighy One" who wills it all!! The Buddha talks about this in his deeply extensive and exhaustive teaching. He actually confronts one of the most powerful God's, Lord Brahma, known by most all beings in the higher heavens as the "creator" or "soul" of the universe, which over many eons they fight over who actually is the "creator." Yes, even the God's fight over this, even though they preach oneness. Anyway, the Buddha said to him, "Then you're going to take responsibility for all the suffering of the universe?" Which is pretty much what theists do, is offer everything back to this, "one". In this offering you rise! You will experience the high heavens for eons! But once that karma exhausts... who knows where you'll go? The only way to find out is by delving more deeply into this experience of oneness. Kundalini is really just inter-personal awareness's and inter-personal karmic alignments being illuminated. There really is no kundalini as an intelligent and independent force behind it all, this is just another notion arising dependent upon self clinging, but on an ultimate level. It's reflective of the extreme of Eternalism. It's an attachment, and one that ultimately leads to unsatisfactoriness, even after the hell realms are emptied and the middle realms are emptied, and then the heaven realms of the long lived Gods' are emptied. These teachings come from the long lived Gods'. These realms Buddha talked about going to and having access to during his trip through the different meditative states. These realms I've verified for myself through going through these different meditative states as well. The Buddha did teach something different, it's a paradigm shift in perception and interpretation of the nature of perception on a deeply intuitive level that does reflect third eye activity. The seeming will of the Energy you are experiencing is a complex assortment of your own karmas and also the will of the God's within your karmic lineage all working together. It's really not a one individual will. It is positive, but it's just the other extreme from the hell of Nihilism, thus not the path of the middle way. We do not merge with a formless level of being, we cut through even "oneness" and empty that level of clinging as well in order to truly liberate from the unconscious recycling program that is the universe, not to transcend it per say, but to truly see right through it, even while being a part of it. I wish you well!

Yes, that's interesting. The process of the Way of things is impersonal and only personalized through sentient beings.

That's the state of natural liberation, where all arisings are excepted as empty of any power to bind, thus they are all experienced with the "one taste" of liberated bliss. Thus my quote below in my signature.

Which is why a high being in any tradition can come to Dzogchen, get transmission, recieve the contemplation of Thogal and they would also attain Buddhahood in this very life as well as the Jalus if they don't make too many disciples. Anyone who attains the Jalus generally doesn't have lots of disciples. Either that or all their disciples are very good disciples.

Yes, of course.

It's in the Shakti/Shaivite texts going back more than 1,000 years. Look up Kshemaraja, Abhinavagupta, Utpaladeva, also Jnaneshwar talks about it a little bit as Diksha, so does Shankaracharya. It's also in the Nath tradition, who are also Shaivite. The term Shaktipat is an old Sanskrit term meaning, "decent of grace." Read, "Triadic Heart of Shiva" by Paul Muller Ortega, he'll quote from lots of old Hindu texts for you. The Triadic Heart of Siva: Kaula Tantricism of Abhinavagupta in the Non-Dual Shaivism of Kashmir (Suny Series, Shaiva Traditions of Kashmir) It's also talked about in the Siddhar tradition of Tamil Nadu which is also old, though from a different language than Sanskrit... as you know.

Kundalini awakening and Rigpa is different, coming from a different place, with a different aim. It's not different in the sense that it's just awareness, but how it's utilized is different in the tradition of Rigpa from kundalini. Dzogchen already sees that it's just awareness and karma, thus we use the term Rigpa, which just basically means awakened awareness.

In Dzogchen, yes... because it's based upon Right View with the goal of endless awakened activity for the sake of endless sentient beings. People attain the body of light in other traditions, but because it doesn't originate from the basis of "right view" it's actually a different attainment, even if it looks the same, i.e. disappearance of the body into light. Because in most traditions the person is just merging into a long lived formless god realm made of blissful consciousness without awareness of activity, as more of an escape from action. So it's not really the attainment of the 3 kayas (dharmakaya, sambhogakaya, nirmanakaya) as discussed in Buddhism.

The two traditions don't have the same goal. You're comparing apples and oranges, both fruit, but with different seeds and different end results. Also, just because someone attains a Rainbow body or Body of light, doesn't mean they are a Buddha, unless they have the perspective. So, those that attain it in Dzogchen are considered Buddhas, because they have the perspective or "right view." Right View has to do with compassion and emptiness.

Will not become liberated in this life, but will within I think it's at most 3 lifetimes? If they've actually experienced Rigpa. Not all Dzogchenpas have experienced Rigpa. Really experiencing Rigpa includes a glimpse at omniscience, as in you see the 6 realms, 31 planes and all associated phenomena of the universe and all complexity makes sense in a simple timeless moment from the perspective of dependent origination/emptiness.

What I'm saying is that it's just awareness, there really is no kundalini. But, this perspective will slap a lot of faces and conceptions as well as attachments. I'm just sharing my opinion is all. There is no real kundalini, and there is no spiraling either. Sometimes your body will rock or kind of spin, but that's just karmas being brought out of the unconscious due to awareness illuminating that. Have you even had what is called, "kundalini awakening?" Have you received Shaktipat? (Yes, I use the perineum to ground high vibration into my body)

Most Indians have no connection to the really esoteric forms of Hinduism. But, if you get into contact with a real school of Tantric Shaivism, you will see that it is worshiped. It's in all the Tantric Shaivite texts that talk about Kundalini.

Samkhya: Purusha (light of awareness) Prakriti (Karma or from a more Shaivite perspective, coagulated awareness activity) Prana is also karma (which means action), just the energy of awareness. There is no kundalini as a separate individual being, it's just awareness, it's just light. What I'm saying is that the tradition of Kundalini revolves around a mis-understanding of the nature of experience and comes from a deep attachment to a self/Self or "the divine" as a ground of being. Because Buddhists don't see experience as coming from that as a perspective, there is an entirely different goal in mind as well as an entirely different understanding of the process that is not merely conceptual, but deeply intuitive.