C T

Yeah labels are none too helpful. A guy who's comfortable in his own skin is un-label-able. He tries mindfully to relate to/interact with others based on merits, i guess. Being non-discriminative, he carves his own niche in the world while all the time bettering his own limitations in order to do that. He learns to accept people as individuals and learn early in life that pettiness and narrow world-views are not cool as that keeps him caged up leading (naturally) to overwhelming needs to think and act defensively most days. Then he gets ulcers and other unpleasanties, and not understand why these things happen to him, being that he thinks he is the nicest guy in the world. A true man requires no reasons, excuses or compensatory attitudes to seek for equality and fairness in his engagement with life. A true man is neither soft nor hard, for he stands in the middle at all times. A true man is shaped by what he perceives to be qualities yet hidden within, not by what others are quick to sling at him. A true man is unmoved by false pretences, and fully moved by small, insignificant gestures that others who see less usually overlook. A true man knows himself first, and seeks always to act from that knowledge. A true man is a master unto himself.

Consider perhaps that seeing and unseeing occurs simultaneously and without a see-er. When the see-er is to the fore of the mind, meaning if one directs awareness to the see-er, then one is observing the see-er, and not that which is being seen. For some, seeing is merely an act of memory recollection, so when someone says something is being seen, what that really means is that there is an attempt to draw out memory from past interactions with a similar object. We all know we cannot cross the same river twice, so to expect to see the same thing repeatedly, even if, for example, that thing is a wall-poster thats been there for years, is a delusion. It is because seeing and unseeing happening simultaneously that freshness is possible, but because people have not been trained to realise this, their minds automatically respond by recollecting similar stored data, give it a label in the process, which leads to the creation of a mind image which leads to the formation of a thought that there are permanent and impermanent objects. In truth, there is no permanency at all in both subject and object, hence the point asserted that arising and ceasing are not two separate happenings but actually one process perceived as two due to mental conditionings. In truth, every time the eyes perceive an object, there is a re-freshing action happening on a cellular level, so every engagement of the senses with an object in actuality is a fresh start from a still point. This makes life interesting and ever-renewable, but only those who take meditation to deeper levels will truly grasp this. It is not easy to grasp due to the conditioned mind's tendency to fluctuate between memory and projection (past & future) by depending on words, names and labels. This dependency is very ingrained and difficult to shift, which is why masters say it takes years to recondition habitual tendencies and rewire reactionary response mechanisms. If one looks at a rose and not try to compartmentalise that looking with name and form, then that looking is present seeing. Some people see a million other roses, plus all the other associated elements, in looking at that one rose, while there are those who would look at a million roses and still think they are only seeing a rose. In the latter way of looking, life can indeed be quite drab and miserable. Same rose, two ways of seeing. Same existence, two different ways of living.

Brilliant talk by Ms. Adichie. Clear and to the point, fair, and thought-provoking.

Maybe in acute situations when one is forced to merge with the truth, as in Hagar's broken back episode, they come face to face looking eye to eye with the their true nature, and i know for a fact that that sparkling essence is neither good nor bad, cannot be made better, neither is it lacking anything, so why does one expect the meeting of truth to make one a better person? Better is a relative term. The waning of neurosis does not actually make one better... it makes one more sane, as if lighter and freer. Whether this is better or not would almost entirely depend on how ready the recipient is.

Do you think this is a minority or majority view, BKA? It doesn't matter if others agree or not, i just want to get an intuitive answer, is all. Cheers!

Whats that, GMP?

Pardon my question, Zanshin... When a woman has become strong, empowered, broken thru the stigmas, developed her brain, what is the probability that she will move on or transcend the identification of being a feminist, or do you think that its a sort of lifestyle choice that once developed will stay indefinitely, like, do some (or many) feminists become softer or harder with age? Also, do you happen to know if there are any statistics on this, for example, at what general age do females start to realise the usefulness of feministic traits, when do they peak, for how long do they remain in the plateau stage, and is there a kind of feministic menopausal period in addition to the natural one that women in general will go thru? And finally, do staunch feminists experience a sort of regressive phase in their consummate roles? I know a lot of men do as they enter the latter years of their life -- a large number become mellower, softer, gentler, more chilled, less aggressive. Of course there are also the exceptional cases, both of which are evident even here on TTB. I think if the above information is available, it can be quite enlightening, in the sense that for those of us who seek to understand what feminism can do for us will be made aware which is the better age group to approach for mature, well-balanced opinions & advice, as opposed to, say, blindly asking. This is to avoid the rebellious, cynical, suspicious, often bitter, angry and less than helpful ones. Not saying all feminists are like this, merely stressing for contrast. Again, there seem to be a spectrum of responsive behavioural differences among the female posters here on TTB, but due to the smallish numbers here on the forum, its hard to draw any accurate conclusions thus far. Thank you, Zanshin, and others who might know. Your viewpoint and feedback will be very much appreciated.

Back to the topic.... Ken McLeod on 'Relationship with teachers': "So many things need to come together: where one is in one’s life, whether the window for spiritual practice is opening or closing, the personalities of the two individuals involved, chance circumstances. I have no prescription for finding a teacher. Look, explore, interview, and, above all else, use your own good sense. Don’t rely on reputation alone. Deep in Western culture, especially in America, is a tendency to look for perfection in our teachers. Tibetans don’t see their teachers the same way. I was at a conference with a number of Asian and Western teachers, and one of the Tibetan teachers said simply, “My teacher is Buddha.” It was very clear that he had no expectation that his ‘teacher’ was a perfect being but this was how he regarded the relationship, this was the source for his spiritual guidance and inspiration. It was a subtle point, not said with the usual rhetoric, and I found it very helpful. My teacher, Kalu Rinpoche was highly accomplished, quite extraordinary. Did I learn everything he had to teach? Not even close. But he was my primary teacher. I’ve done a lot of guru yoga and similar practices with Kalu Rinpoche as the focus, and I don’t see any contradiction between seeing your teacher as Buddha as well as a human being. Remember, Buddha means to be awake. You have to see your teacher as being awake. If you don’t, why are you studying with him or her?"

no offence taken... no apology required.

lol

Sure.

If there's clinging, then the student will of course embody some of the teacher's imperfect ways. But one's practice should bear fruit, ideally speaking, otherwise what is the point of investing time and energy in the path? One sure sign that one's practice is bearing fruit is the gradual disintegration of clinging and aversion, which is the most basic, most troublesome fetter that ties one to samsara more than any other obstacle. When clinging and aversion is finally dropped, then nastiness, being the opposite of goodness, becomes meaningless. Then the behaviour of others will not have the power to rub us in such as a way as to leave us carrying their faults wherever we go -- quite silly, really, to be carrying other people's (gurus included) perceived wrongs with us. Its a burden which we can unyoke whenever we decide we have enough weight on our shoulders as such. We dont have to if we choose not to. What we ought to try to do is to carry/uphold the altruistic principle, the bodhisattva ideal, which a teacher, by virtue of being a teacher, represents. He may be the worst example of a teacher, but to keep holding that view is to miss the point altogther. Our view should be expansive enough to see thru the teacher all the way back up to Buddha Shakyamuni himself. If we do not have the capacity to see that far, then its fair that we should continue with diligent practice, and not care too much about identifying faults in others until we ourselves attain buddhahood. Until then, its better to remain concentrated on our own faults and work on them with patience and compassion. Incidentally, learning the proper way to work with a mandala will be very helpful to equip us with the knowledge of where/how to prioritise things that we come upon in life. Once again, i'd like to re-emphasise that perfection in the context of the OP does not equate to absence of faults. It directly infers attributes relating to one's motivation and aspiration. Motivation here means we have to be aware of what thoughts occupy our minds predominantly because these are the thoughts that will likely shape our words and actions. Aspiration relates to developing the inner desire to cultivate diligently so that we may attain the perfect qualities of buddhahood asap in order to stamp out any trailing bits of dualistic conditioning which will pop up now and again to disrupt or flummox us when it comes to acting with the purest motives for the highest good.

God's creation is perfect, no? One would hope perfection is beyond such a limit as 'finished'.

No worries, anytime.

Their behaviour has absolutely no bearing on the principle of guru yoga though. One practices guru yoga to develop and maintain an on-going relationship with the highest aspiration of the Mahayana Path, not with appointed representatives. If the focus is on the representative and not the ideal, one misses the boat altogether. Unfortunately, grasping and aversion can sometimes manifest even stronger in those who claim to be Dharma practitioners.

I admire a person with an unflinching conviction! Bravo.

Seriously though, some really are crooked. Not many, but some. Gatito may well have spotted one. Im sure there are others too. We should not turn a blind eye based on blind faith.

ps... its clear that i meant if ever you come across another one, bite his behind and dont let go. Cling tightly to what you perceive to be his or her faults, and proclaim such as loud as you can. God will back you up.

Why, thanks! God? Nice. another phantasmagoric creation of the mind. No harm though. God is... after all.

Yes, you gotta name and shame the insincere ones at all costs. Now, go set the world 'right'.

Only one?

Wanting others to be free from suffering, in effect, neutralises the practitioner's mind, which is the first requirement for mind training. Ultimately, this intention benefits everybody, including oneself. This intention will slowly wear down the practitioner's resistance to self-worthiness. For example, when a person who has experienced harm were to generate the sincere wish that others do not experience that same harm, this way of thinking or attitude immediately neutralises some of the poison or karma relating to his or her past. In the beginning, its understandable that such a practice will be quite difficult, but if one has the patience and willpower, over time, it gets easier, eventually leading to complete freedom and pacification of inner conflict. If one simply allows the perceived suffering in others to remain, even though it ultimately may lead to some sort of breakthrough in others, it will not have the same effect on oneself. If not careful, such letting others be could lead to apathetic habits which will take more effort to overcome in the end. Compassion in the Mahayana tradition is not one based on sacrificial ideals but on mutually benefitting ideals. No matter what good is done for others, or what good wishes are generated for others, ultimately, one benefits. The greater the scope of this wish, the more vast that space in the heart.

If the teacher has a pure motive, then its not mind games, since he or she is taking the students' progress quite seriously and meticulously. Clairvoyance and psychic powers could sometimes mean one is able to read subtle signs or mental twitches that others without those siddhis can't. Usually, being told of such dramatic accounts would cause some reaction in the listener, but a well-trained, pacified mind of the yogi-aspirant will ideally remain unmoved -- so, the tales told become more and more bizarre and fantastic, increasing in frequency... and the teacher watches for any mental faltering. Its mind training ultimately, not with a motive to trap or disempower the aspirants.

If it works for you, well and good. Over here, if that was done in certain places, one would get arrested. The hospital is one of these places, another one would be in the airports. Airport security can be quite jumpy as regards to sudden loud noises. Also, there are some German chain supermarkets here that has a really weird customer check-out system. No matter how busy the place is, the maximum number of check-out assistants they will assign to handle the flow is 2, when its super duper frenetic. Other than this, under normal 'busy', only one lane will be opened, regardless. Plus, 95% of these stores have only 3 check-out lanes. A couple of mega stores will have 4. Somehow, one of the lanes is never, ever opened, for some strange reason. Maybe reserved in the event of a stampede. I dunno.