Maddie

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    4,897

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

Posts posted by Maddie

  1. Posted

    4 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

    Is it really so surprising that most Bums can´t get girlfriends?  Many Bums don´t have a "self" and, for many women, particularly the more earthy types, that´s a nonnegotiable.

     

    Ok but being more serious, the social skills of most younger (and some older) guys these days is just awful. 

    • Like 1

  2. Posted · Edited by Maddie

    1 minute ago, liminal_luke said:

    Is it really so surprising that most Bums can´t get girlfriends?  Many Bums don´t have a "self" and, for many women, particularly the more earthy types, that´s a nonnegotiable.

     

    Or maybe if they do feel a self that wants a girlfriend they spiritualize it away lol. 🤭

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  3. Posted

    These last few tidbits of information have been very interesting since I have never heard of this before, and Zhunti mantra has been one of my longest running practices. 

     

    I have seen my clinic continue to improve as I continue with the mantra, but I also notice I keep thinking about "emptiness" more as well. 

  6. Posted

    6 hours ago, EFreethought said:

     

    Maybe you have been over this, but: how did you come across the Chundi mantra? And what other mantras did you try? Give us your testa-chundi.

     

    I have never tried it. I first read about it on Bill Bodri's site.

     

    I think someone on this website referenced Bill Brody's website for something else and then I was just scrolling through the articles and I came across that and I found the description fascinating because I was obsessed with karma.

  8. Posted

    4 minutes ago, SirPalomides said:

    As quoted here:

     

    It is a defining feature of Zhunti practice, beginning with the Tang translation of the Cundī Dhāraṇī scriptures, that devotees are encouraged to use a mirror – "as an altar" (wei tan), some of the texts say – to facilitate visualization. Gazing into a mirror while reciting the dhāraṇī, one is to visualize both the image of the deity and the mystic letters that embody her. In time, the small disc-shaped bronze mirrors used for this purpose came to be commonly imprinted, on the back, with the deity's iconic form, according to the canonical description, and, on the front and/or the back, with the inscribed dhāraṇī. It was not unusual to have the Sanskrit version of the spell embossed on the outer edge of the front or reflecting side of the disc, and to have the transliterated Chinese version embossed on the circumference of the back. The effect is of an image of the goddess encircled by "garlands" of sacred syllables, as though to reinforce the claim that the goddess and the incantation were inseparable, perhaps even mutually constitutive. And, of course, as the instrument in question is a mirror, the fusion of goddess and spell is further fused with the practitioner's own reflection. Sometimes, to emphasize the theme of communion between devotee and deity, the goddess's image is imprinted on the back of the mirror, facing backwards, so that someone viewing the rear of the mirror would see the back of the goddess and could therefore easily imagine, when gazing at his or her own image in the front of the mirror, that it was the goddess herself, in the guise of one's own visage, who is gazing back

     

    wow that is very interesting, this is the first time I have ever heard of this! 

  12. Posted

    1 minute ago, EFreethought said:

     

    Are there any recordings you recommend? Or YouTube videos?

     

    And does listening have the same effect as actually saying it?

     

     

     

    In my experience since this is such a powerful mantra I get almost the same effect listening as I do actually chanting it. 

  13. Posted

    57 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

     

    We have different takes on boredom but I´ll say this: unlike some spiritual practices, your writing is not boring.  ^_^

     

    I would say from a Buddhist POV boredom is desire unfulfilled. 

  17. Posted

    2 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

     

    Theravada's strength is also its weakness, very detailed meditation instructions. It does not say that after you learn the meditations you should practice then exactly like that , so it doesn't discourage tailoring them to yourself later.

    But in group sessions exactly because they're very structured one can only follow the structure.

    While in other practices with less structure, group sessions can be more freeform.

     

    I doubt the Buddha had very rigid structures in mind but instead gave very analytical meditation instructions to avoid misunderstandings on what they're about and also as an education tool.

     

    Yes, my early experiences with Theravada meditation instruction seemed to be quite rigid and I found that the way I was being taught didn't work for me. It was after I found a way that worked for me that things improved. 

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    38 minutes ago, Apech said:

     

    I've never practiced Theravada so perhaps I shouldn't comment.  I am sure there is a lot of good in it and a good fit for many.  When I was researching the history of Buddhism the work of certain bhikshus was very useful, sincere and well researched.  But I never found it attractive as a vehicle for my work ... but this may be a personal thing.  I think originally this is how it was and according to the testimony of Chinese Buddhsts visiting India it was the case that monks in same monastery would practice sutrayana and mahayana side by side.  It is thought that mahayana was at one time just a monority practice in many communities which grew in popularity over time to gradually replace the sravaka tradition.  There was no schism just a gradual growing apart over time.

     

     

     

    Theravada was my primary introduction into Buddhism, and I do  think there is a lot of good in it for sure, I just didn't find the claims that it was practically synonymous with early Buddhism to be completely accurate. 

    • Like 1

  20. Posted

    Just now, Apech said:

     

    Theravada likes to present itself as something like pure Buddhism but it has a long history of its own which is worth looking at.  If you have read Buddhaghosa for instance you might wonder what is going on. lol.

     

    I've never heard of the Buddhaghosa before. Yes I have noticed this as well. Theravada likes to portray itself as (in some cases) almost identical to original Buddhism, and at the beginning I took this for granted since I did not know any better. In time however as I read more of the Pali canon and then saw what the Theravada did and thought this did not seem to be exactly the case in my opinion. 

    • Like 1

  21. Posted

    Just now, Apech said:

     

     

    I think that at least in some respects the Pali Canon is the result of Ashoka's imperial capture of what was previously a minority religion.  An attempt at orthodoxy like what happened with early Christian texts at Nicea and so on.

     

     

     

    Ok so I was kind of in the ballpark in regards to your point lol. I think this is a very interesting and worthy point to explore due to the fact that the sense of Buddhism I get from reading the Pali canon is somewhat different from what I see in modern day Theravada being practiced. 

  22. Posted

    1 minute ago, Apech said:

     

    There are various theories, including the suggestion that it is comparable to Muslim artists not portraying the prophet (pbuh) - but I think this is unlikely.  I think it is because the Buddha was the Tathagata - 'thus gone one' and so it was an artistic device to show that although he was present ... he was also beyond 'self' and thus shown as a void.

     

     

     

    The Buddha would often tell his followers not to cling to his physical form because to do so was missing the point of the Dharma. I think this is why early Buddhist art does not depict him very often. 

    • Like 2

  23. Posted

    2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

     

    It is significant and this still the case in Theravadan tradition, very little statues, very little paintings etc.

    The Buddha (per Pali Canon) advised against worship and ritual.

     

    Tbh my take the inverse of Apech's.

     

    The closest to early Buddhism would be Theravadan Buddhism, after that/very close some Zen lineages.

    Tibetan probably being the furthest away from the historical Buddha as it was incorporated Tantric practices which appeared later than the historical Buddha, Yogas, which again didn't exist at the time of the historical Buddha, Dzogchen, which is of unknown origins etc.

     

    I could be wrong, but what I think Apech is arguing here is that the reason it seems that Theravada is the closest to original Buddhism is because of the work of Ashoka, and maybe it is actually closer to that. Not saying this is correct or incorrect but maybe what Apech was saying in his hypothesis? 

  25. Posted · Edited by Maddie

    20 minutes ago, kyoji said:

    yes but you act as if it is some cultural instituted problem and not the fact that we as humans can be quite weak, and sometimes lack the resolve to seek the good. Should one not feel guilt when they know they've done something that is a disservice to their higher ideals?

     

    No, there is no benefit, only suffering. Be kind to yourself :-) <3

     

    Compassion is the answer, not judgment. 

    • Like 1