forestofclarity

The Daobums Thread Devlolutionary Syndrome. It usually happens around page 3-4, and totally triumphs by page 9-10.

Not per Tibetan Buddhism. You can reach full Buddhahood in the bardo of clear light. In fact, it is stated that it is easier without the limitations of the body. Nor is Nirmanakaya is limited to the physical body. Finally, many masters states that if one is focused on the key principle, then the body spontaneously transforms. The problem as I see it is that from a Buddhist POV, anything that arises will pass, because it is conditioned and depends on causes and conditions. Even the so-called immortal gods die. The only exceptions through the scriptures are space and nirvana. I don't think there is an attachment against transforming the physical body, but it is stated in many scriptures that transformation of the physical body may be unrelated to enlightenment. Physical cultivation when used is typically viewed as a means (to cultivate wisdom) rather than an end.

Most people do. I've found that few traditions outside of the India take seriously the problem of epistemology (how we know what we know). But if you really push the inquiry, nearly everyone finds that the whole mechanism breaks down outside of direct experience.

I don't think it is possible to ever truly verify whether some one else is enlightened (whatever one means by that, the definition varies). There is a Zen saying that even the teacher appears in the mirror of the student, so any manifestation of another's enlightenment is arising in one's own mind. So at best, one can attempt to infer that some one else is enlightened, but as an inference is it always subject to doubt.

I don't think you can ever really know for sure, but you can tell whether a teaching helps you. I have been learned that there are three main things: 1. The teaching of the teacher 2. The teaching of the tradition, usually in the form of scriptures and commentators 3. Personal experience These keep each other in check. If the teacher does not align with the tradition or your experience, then you should find another. If your thoughts of accomplishment do not accord with the teacher and the tradition, you're likely delusional. And the scriptures/commentaries are dead letter unless they come to life in the living experience of yourself and the teacher. I would also add that as a Buddhist, I have been taught generally to look for an increase in compassion over time, and a decrease in suffering.

This is an interesting question that I think we can all relate to. Let me toss some thoughts: It seems to me the problem is ignorance rather than fear. I don't see anything wrong with fear generally--- it is a set of reactions designed to keep us alive. In a road rage situation, getting attacked, run off the road, or shot at is always a possibility. So I don't agree that a fear reaction is necessarily unwise. There is no way to know whether the encounter is going to be violent or not. If you assume it will be, and it isn't, you haven't lost anything. But if you presume it will not be, and it is, then there's a big problem. From a certain sense, fear is an evolutionary tool that has emerged to keep us safe. (FWIW, I have a no interactions policy with road rage. If some one is angry, I don't interact with them at all, because usually the rage is a result of an escalation that happens when there is some communication.) This is different than say sitting at home if we live is a relatively safe place worrying about a serial killer breaking in and murdering us. Or if we fear death because we think we are the body, or we believe ourselves to be separate from the world or something. But these are ignorance problems, and once the ignorance is removed, what arises is a fuller, unhidered expression of the Dao.

I thought this might be of interest to some here. https://non-duality.rupertspira.com/meet/2020/10/31/webinar-with-rupert-and-swami-sarvapriyananda#details

That's not necessarily a bad thing. Much of my practice is about unlearning things.

It is not just these two, but probably 85% of spiritual teachers from meditative traditions teach the same thing. I don't think it is based on a philosophy, but rather experience. From a Buddhist POV, it makes sense. Anything that begins must end. Anything that arises is based on conditions, and when the conditions cease, the appearance also ceases. Accordingly, basing one's peace and happiness on temporary arisings leads to one's peace and happiness also being temporary. Per the teachers, we must find a firmer foundation. I've found this to be true. I find that I am far more happy when I have a more spiritual orientation and focus on self-enquiry types of practices. I think a large part of the struggle is having enough confidence in the teaching.

Mere claims and statements should never be enough. However, I don't agree that religious and spiritual traditions rely on mere statements. I would say in particular the Indic traditions (Vedanta, Buddhism, etc.) are very much experientially based traditions. However, there is a small but growing body of scientific research checking into supernatural claims. A good start is this study compiled by the University of Virginia. https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/book/mind-beyond-brain-buddhism-science-and-the-paranormal/

This is an odd time. This year, the world has been literally on fire. The sun is dimmed from the smoke, all the way to Eastern Colorado. There is a pandemic. There was a hurricane in the middle of the United States. Hurricanes are more frequent and intense. We are in a post-factual world, titling toward fascism. Guns and ammo are sold out. People believe a satanic cult is running the world because of internet posts on 8chan. Politicians are robbing from the poor to give to the rich. When I was in high school reading Animal Farm, I thought "At least this could never happen in this day and age." Wow, was I ever wrong. Despite all of this, I feel fine (even though I feel a lot of sympathetic suffering). Part of it is due to a combination of good choices, good luck and undeserved privilege. A large part of it is due to practice. I thoroughly recommend strong spiritual convictions, of any kind. Living without them seems heartbreaking. I think a lot of Victor Frankl here: “Those who have a 'why' to live, can bear with almost any 'how'.”

The Lovecraft mythos capture perfectly the modern times for me. It seems to be a blend of modern scientific materialism and consumerist materialism. The idea of a blind, godless universe ruled by demonic forces that are hostile to mankind, and humanity itself seeking to bring these destructive forces to manifestation is not unlike our own drive to consume the planet and destroy ourselves. The central figure here is not a kind, benevolent creator deity but a deaf, dumb, blind god of randomness. Truly, the only sane approach in such a world is madness. Similarly, institutional and systematic racism as is as senseless as it is intertwined with American culture. "Othering" seems to be so fundamental to humanity, given how widespread and popular it is (racism, sexism, ableism, anti-LGBTQ, colorism, etc. the list is endless. Like Lovecraft's cults, it is a deeply embedded part of our existence, it is very self destructive, and it should drive us mad.

Actually, your arguments are weigh against a reality that exists independently of any observer. The different beings observe different appearances suggests that these appearances, far from being solid and real, and in fact illusory (or magical).

I would actually be curious about what you learned about eyesight improvemenet, but that is for another thread. Going off of @steve's point, there is actually no three dimensional "space" in the photo--- the photo is really a two dimensional representation, a flattening, of objects and space. The 3-D space here is created by the mind. It is an illusion (i.e. you can't store your coffee cups in the space next to the cow). So are you "noticing" the space, or creating it (if you like, co-creating it with the photo)?

I followed the rules and did not see the image. However, after it was pointed out, I cannot unsee it. It is sort of like those magic eye things, which are always hard for me (I have issues with depth perception.) The image arose out of the muddles colors almost like the image of a dream forming. But unlike those magic eye things, it remains. For me, this is a perfect lesson in reifying perception. At first, you are just presented with a swirl of color. Then, when you are able to "grasp" at a the pattern, the image appears and looks like an object.

It looks like an old photo, or what I have no idea. No objects jump out. It just looks like dark colors in one corner, some light colors in the middle, and a sort of blur of colors in the lower right. It looks sort of like an abstract painting, or something you'd see in a microscope.

Thought certainly isn't limited to language. For example, if some one says fish, a little image or several images of a fish pops into my head. For others, the word "fish" may appear. For others, there may be a mix, or some other method.

If you like cheesy 1980's inspired action comedies that are shamelessly over the top, then it's a great piece of pop culture. It also appears to be aware of its own ridiculousness, and does criticize some of its own tropes. My family and I DO happen to like cheesy 1980's inspired action comedies that are shamelessly over the top, so we've thoroughly enjoyed it. However, the best piece of cheesy, over-the-top martial arts movie about the (spiritual) path is Circle of Iron. Unfortunately, it stars David Carradine instead of Bruce Lee (who of course had died by then), which is a kind of sore spot given how the tv show "Kung Fu" panned out (i.e. Bruce pitching the Warrior about a martial artist in the old West, but then passed over the role for DC).

It seems to me that conceptuality is one extreme, and nonconceptuality is the other. It is fashionable in spiritual circles to deride words and concepts as meaningless or obstructing the truth. It strikes me that it is easy to bullsh!t oneself and hide behind inexpressibility. However, not everything that is inexpressible is the same. The taste of sugar and the taste of sour candy are inexpressible, but very different. The qualia "red" and the taste of sugar are also both inexpressible, but quite different. There are a few ways I've seen conceptuality addressed in a reasonable way. One is by using subtler and subtler concepts to lead one to conceptuality. In Vedanta circles, this is often illustrated by using tree branches to point to bright stars, and using bright stars to lead one to a subtle, dimmer star. This happens with Tibetan Buddhism by leading the student through different vehicles or yanas. The other is using concepts as a pointer. I got a very real taste of this with Zen meditation. In Zen, I realized everyone was doing something different on their cushion. Some people were just thinking. Some people were resting in thinking. Some people would sink into a dull trance. Some people would develop fixed concentration and develop concentrative states.However, these are all nonconceptual states, but none are what Zen was pointing to. Yet using my words, most meditators will know what I am referring to. To me, this is the real value of Indo-Tibetan sources-- they have found a way to point to the inexpressible quite precisely.

My probably unpopular opinion is that energy work isn't really a good idea for most people for some time. In some regards, it can be tossing gasoline on the fire if you have serious mental/emotional/physical issues. In my limited experience, I have noticed that people who tend to focus on the energy aspects often get more energy, but this only makes jerks into BIG jerks, arrogant people into REALLY arrogant people, and violent people MORE violent. Of course, this happened to me, and so I stopped energy practices for many years. Many people on this forum (again, including me) used to jump willy-nilly into whatever practice came along. I note that many people ended up burned by such an approach, and many of the seasoned folks now practice within a tradition. I am a Buddhist so the usual order is to first develop one's morals, then develop a calm and peaceful mind (relatively speaking) before increasing the wattage or amps one pours through the system. Starting with basic morality and mindfulness is often a good foundation, because these things tend to calm the mind to the degree that we can look and see what is going on. I would strongly recommend working with a living teacher rather than trying to give it a go from books or recordings. I don't know a single person who never made an error on the spiritual path--- some might say making errors IS the spiritual path. Having a teacher can really help ensure those errors don't mess you up. This can be especially important if you have mental, emotional, or physical illnesses, which everyone does to some degree.

I am sorry Limahong, but I have blocked you because I find your pictures/graphics fill up threads which makes the forum unreadable to me. Have you considered using them less?

I wanted to solicit thoughts on spontaneous qigong. My initial journey into tai chi and qigong involved the teachings of Sifu Wong Kiew Kit (WKK) some time ago. Per WKK, spontaneous qigong was the source of one's power. He taught that qi has a natural intelligence and it would seek out and fix your problems. I note that WKK taught primarily for health/martial arts. The spontaneous movements were more of an allowing --- I never felt strongly controlled by them although the more I relaxed into them, the stronger they got. When I was on an intense Theravada retreat some time later, I began to manifest spontaneous movements. I asked the teacher about it, Bhante Rahula, who told me not to give in to the movements but just keep doing the practice (Vipassana). I intentionally stopped the movements. I felt a strange sort of pressure building, and then a fabulous internal display of fireworks occurred as things started to open inside, including my legs. This permanently changed how much pain I felt while sitting. These movements were very strong--- while I could intentionally prevent them, it felt like some thing else was controlling my body. My anecdotal, uneducated theory is that the same energies can be externally expressed in spontaneous movements, or internally by opening channels and so on. If so, then it seems that spontaneous qigong might be good for martial arts (because it is about expressing) but not necessarily good for spiritual practices (which tend to use energy for more internal uses). I have not had a lot of teachings on this, so I thought I would see if anyone here had some thoughts and comments.

That would be nice. I appreciate it when translators include key terms in the back, or put them in parenthesis. I feel like I am constantly having to "untranslate" key terms so I know what they're talking about.

We are very good at disenfranchisement. Gerrymandering, purging voter rolls, prohibiting mail in ballots, etc. People like to talk about conspiracy theories, but the scary stuff is actually fairly out in the open.

I'm not sure how to even phrase my question: What do you think about it? or How do you feel about it? or How do you see it?