C T

Im sorry, but your question was rather general.

Hi Satya, nice article, educational videos too, but nicer still, and definitely more meaningful, would be hearing words echoing from your own heart.

Yes, for this life at least, afraid i have to stick to what i do best. As mentioned, for me, its not a moral consideration, although in my daily life, i am mindful of alleviating the distress of even the tiniest of insects, and will not intentionally harm any, in fact, if i see a trapped insect, perhaps a fly that had fallen into a pool of water, or sometimes a worm may be found struggling on the tarmac, i will spontaneously scoop it up and gently place it somewhere out of harm's way. I know full well there are many that escape my attention, and many others do get killed as a result of my actions, for eg, driving at night would inevitably cause the death of thousands of insects, so to balance this, i will chant rounds of Mani mantras for those are killed. At this stage of my evolution, i am comfortable with having cultivated the habit of feeling a sort of urgency to help when i see suffering and try my best to ease that whenever possible, and as a result, this has sharpened my motivation aka bodhicitta. Im far from perfect in this, but at least, i try my best to keep my eyes open in the presence of sentient distress. I love dogs immensely, and sometimes tears would well up in my eyes whenever i come across wanton cruelty being laid upon these beautiful animals, and even other animals, for that matter. Down the road, i can see that a pensioner's ambition of mine would be to set up some sort of animal sanctuary where neglected or homeless animals can find shelter and get a decent amount of care which they deserve. Its a dream which may yet turn to reality. If it does, it will go some way to balance my karma.

But taking care of self goes without saying, right? I mean, that aspect of it is not separate from the flow of Tao, or do you see it as 2 distinct occurrences?

Children are generally happy from innocence; adults have to carve their way to happiness. The adult happiness/bliss, when uncovered, is tempered with fore-knowledge ripening hopefully to wisdom, whereas a child's bliss is tempered with pre-knowing, minus wisdom. In this context, wisdom implies the on-going ability to discern what are good habits to cultivate, and to exercise discipline, determination, joy and forbearance in the instillation of such in daily activities, without the need to delve analytically into the past to root out old traumas in order to find closure and set things right. This is a waste of time, imo.

I believe that there are a number of them in Malaysia who are. Hermits who live in cave temples, with simple diets, mostly grown themselves or taken from the community veg plots.

Eating meat has a heavier karma, and dont think eating veg alone has no karma, there's karma too, only lighter. Maybe this points to meat-eaters having to invest more time in practice, and non-meat eaters less, but there's no evidence to suggest that not eating meat makes one 'purer' than a meat-eating spiritual cultivator. I think this is mostly an individual preference. The Buddha's advice to determine everything using our own discriminating insights and inner perception is very apt in this regard. If we are mindful, we will know precisely what is the right course of action that brings the least harm to ourselves and other sentient beings. This is a good approach, at least until we reach the higher levels of insight anyway. At that point, we can look towards blessing every single being by turning all of our body, speech and mind activities for the benefit of leading beings to the shores of enlightenment, just like buddhas and bodhisattvas do, without a moment's hesitation. Personally, being a chef, my work requires that i eat everything, to taste everything to make sure that standards are maintained. I have to constantly evaluate menus and stuff, and this presents quite a challenge when i have to explain to some students who question my meat-eating routine. Over the years, i have consciously reduced meat consumption simply because i listen to my body telling me that less is best. So other than work commitments, in personal life i might now only eat meat once or twice a week, whereas before it used to be a daily thing. This has nothing at all to do with my spiritual practice, which is supposed to be beyond mundanity, and things like food, clothing and shelter, in my book, is definitely classified as mundane considerations and should not impact us to the point that we set up traps and/or potholes for ourselves where there should be none.

Actually, the 'you' of 10 days ago is already gone, but thats hardly noticeable, isn't it? So, in a sense, we are all vanishing and reappearing every single moment... just like breathing. And just like the cycle of every breath, between the ins- and the outs- there are short pauses. Its been hinted that true freedom, or complete reality, lies right there in that very space of unimpeded openness, total potential, and absolute vulnerability all pooled into one vast expanse of emptiness united with awareness simultaneously. Thats what people say, i dunno if there's any truth in it though...

Aversions are easy to spot... its the blissful states that would be more enchantingly troublesome.

It would be nice if you try to resist painting enlightenment as some super-state of being.

Its not that complicated really. This is quite a good commentary on enlightenment, i think.

Thats wonderful! A truly enlightening practice indeed. It defines 'bodhicitta' in a nutshell, which is also the basis for unequivocal liberation, isn't it? Think about it: What is the biggest delusion which blinds us to seeing our own perfection? Apparently, its the limitations of our small-minded self, fumbling around preoccupied with nothing much else except our own petty circumstances. A Buddhist teacher, when asked what defines Buddhahood, said that Buddhahood is sometimes defined as the unlimited capacity to manifest anything at all to satisfy sentient being's need for peace and happiness. Unless we are able to get out of our own way, this will be a difficult challenge, and until we can get out of our own way, we will only be stifling our own buddha seed from sprouting.

Thumbs up! Palms together, lets do it! (been doing it actually for some time now as part of a daily practice routine...)

The general advice one would hear from Buddhist teachers in relation to this is: Drop analysis, just observe how the thoughts change without assigning preferences of good and bad. By the habit of analysis, those things that you see as blockages, instead of getting weaker, actually gain in strength and size simply by way of getting attention. And attention naturally requires analysis, which also requires names and labels. All these factors point to one thing: setting up boundaries and limitations where there are none. This is by far one of the most prevalent habitual trait that takes some effort to overhaul. It is mostly this that prevents the presence of being fully present, if that makes any sense.

Well, sir, firstly, her name is Dorothy Maclean, and if she's in her entities, that would mean she is presently in her nineties, is that right? http://www.findhorn.org/2014/01/dorothy-maclean-94/#.U9fqMIBdU-k

nice one! Saw this a few weeks ago & thought it was really special. Remember thinking that the title could be, should be, 'Chicken Hugging Boy'...

Perhaps i should clarify: There is enlightenment, the innermost essence of what is, but there is no 'body' to attain that essence. You can't, i can't, Obama can't. For we cannot attain something we have never lost. There is no suffering, the nature of which is false, but the moment we conceive of an 'I' (which then sets the 12 links in motion), birth, old age, sickness and death enters the fray with much aplomb. Which explains why i said that enlightenment is the default state of all sentient beings. Those who are caught up with the notion that there is a 'self' which enlightens is bound by a gold chain, and those who are caught up with the notion that life is suffering is also bound -- with a thicker chain, made of lead. The happy news is that if you don't do the work, you'll definitely remain stuck. If you do the work, then you might hopefully gain the realisation that you were never stuck in the first place. Take your pick. edit.. grammar.

Im not aware of making any corrections. You must be mistaken.

I dont think you are following my posts too well.

Put it this way... the fundamental work has to be done first and foremost, and this is to disband craving and delusional tendencies, to yank these out at the root. At least this is what the Mahayana path encourages its followers to observe. If there is even the slightest traces of craving and delusion, giving rise to a false conception of an 'I', then even the highest practices will serve no different than like a gold chain around one's neck at one end and a concrete block at the other, and no matter how devout and diligent a practitioner puts him or herself to the task of gaining enlightenment, he or she will lose it for sure. If a simple person, having fully grasped the meaning of union of wisdom and emptiness, and in the process conquer all attachment to a false sense of selfhood, then even if he or she does not have the good karma to adopt all kinds of sophistry with regards to energetic practices, then he or she will still attain to liberation. In this sense, it is safe to say that the primary work is to first train the mind, followed by the taking on of energetic practices or whatever one fancies doing, rather than doing the practices with the aim of that leading to a tamed mind. This is the common sense approach from the Mahayana perspective. Therefore, the question of whether acupuncture and/or other energetic cultivations can lead to enlightenment or not comes with the hopeful understanding that there are prerequisites involved. For the practitioner who has gained wisdom and compassion to a high degree, then all practices can lead to liberation, even the most mundane ones. On the other hand, if a practitioner still clings to dualistic thoughts, then no matter what practices are undertaken, there will be limited benefits. At least this is how the Mahayana path approaches the matter.

But the Buddhist teachings have been saying this all along, but hardly anyone listens. Master Hui Neng epitomises the above by declaring, "Affliction is itself Bodhi!".

Yes, on the outer level, the level of form, we have to do the work and put in the right effort coupled with the right view and a reliance on ethics and the Vinaya as our foundational guide. On the inner level, we rely on the secret Mantrayana's generation and completion stages to lead us further along... And finally, at the innermost level, we develop a private, unspoken affinity with the Great Perfection to bring us as close as possible to the attainment of rainbow body in one lifetime (maybe not this one, but we can use this opportune lifetime as the precursor towards that noble goal, hopefully in the next one). The above is the friendly advice given by Padmasambhava to all aspiring Dzogchen practitioners.

Enlightenment is to be completely free of craving and delusion, from the Buddhist perspective. Craving and delusion, the father and mother of samsara, adopts suffering as the nanny to the false sense of self. Therefore, enlightenment is our default state, one which never-endingly renews itself in the complete absence of the 'I' trace. If anyone thinks that there is actually a person to attain enlightenment, then that is not the Buddhist view of what enlightenment is. The Jewel Heap Sutra explains this point most clearly, if anyone interested they are welcome to read it up. A short excerpt below: “Kasyapa! Some monks observe the precepts completely. They are always afraid of committing any transgression, whether major or minor, and obey all the rules of discipline they have learned. They are pure in action, word, and thought, and adopt a pure, right means of livelihood. However, they uphold the doctrine, which claims that there is a real ‘self’. These people constitute the first kind of monk who breaks the precepts but seems to keep the precepts well. Kasyapa, some monks practice all twelve austerities, but see something attainable in doing so. They constitute the fourth kind of monk who breaks the precepts but seems to keep the precepts well.” The Mahāvaipulya Mahāsamghāta Sutra also said: “If a bodhisattva claims: I uphold the precepts, he breaks the precepts; this is a false bodhisattva.” For the same reason, the Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom also said: “An ordinary person breaks the precepts, a superior person upholds the precepts, the most outstanding person does not uphold the precepts.”

Really? If thats the case, almost anything can be part of the equation, subject to each individual's biases.

Yup, which is why i haven't got a TV at home for 2 years now. What peace there is without it. Before that i used to have 3 of em, one in the lounge, one in the bedroom and the third in the kitchen. Man, the dependency levels were crazeeee... and its not even easily spotted.