C T

No, It hasn't completely cleared the misconception you laid on to me earlier that I had somehow taken the bs remark out of context, to which I've already clarified above. I anticipated that you might have referenced the wrong bs quote of the OP's, thats why in my last comment above, I reiterated both the remarks (that contained the bs) for your perusal, with added emphasis and context. It explains how I came to ask that question about why the OP considered it bs that I chose to engage with EG. Its self explanatory, if you'd like to read or reread what was written.

And I've respectfully clarified very early on your assumption of what transpired with the OP. And, just to clarify, I was enquiring of the OP wrt to the 'BS' which you somehow assumed I misperceived based on this comment by the OP - "you asked me questions and i replied to them and instead you dont say anything about that but refer to what that troll says which is just pure bullshit". I read this tantrum as him calling bs because I had responded to EG before addressing his questions. How would you read it? Perhaps you might have contextualized your comment based on this statement from the OP: "you asked me questions , than instead of following it up you just respond to earl greys trolling ( i try to ignore him as much as i can) - what he wrote is pure bullshit." Im not certain to which bs comment you're referring to, or maybe to both of them. No idea at all.

You're entitled to presuppose, and also alter any and all assumptions should they arise, although as a whole, I'm inclined to generally feel that expectations, be it here or on the spiritual path, are best kept to a minimum, or if at all possible, best left aside. Just imo. I trust you know how best to ideate your personal inner journey.

You seem quite intimated to what the OP is feeling and thinking, to the extent you're able to know how he/she perceives things. A rare gift indeed.

Appreciate the clarification, and for empathizing with the OP in the likelihood that that was what the OP felt. Astute as it may be, I would see it as somewhat more pertinent to direct your analysis to that perceived defensiveness instead - this will directly benefit the OP since he seems to show slight disdain at being excluded from conversations.

My reply to Earl Grey indicated support to the OP, and also indicated that the reason I got interested here is because Im always willing to engage believing those who posed questions are sincere, which I said is what matters most to me. I'd assume that if the OP understood that straightforward comment, he would not form the idea that I was 'talking about him' but instead would feel heartened and reassured that he was being thought of as sincere. It was a positive assessment that he, being a tad sensitive (by his own admission... to being overly sensitive for reasons known to him), misunderstood. Anyway, I dont see what the issue is. Sub-conversations and cross references to other commenters within threads happen as a matter of fact. How should this filler be read? Did you perhaps think that I might consider you to be overly abrupt had you ended your comment thus:

∞ THE BARDO TEACHINGS BY GYALWA DOKHAMPA ∞ A series of 7 clips https://www.youtube.com/user/drukpakham/videos

As explained, I wasn't being rude, but if you don't have the patience, I can see why it was perceived that way. More progressive members than me have been reaching out to offer help, and earlier on, I've expressed understanding and empathized with your situation, and why maybe someone like yourself might require a bit more patience to work on getting the right footing in terms of interacting with others. Nobody has the time to argue with you. If you value input, then be sincere with others who offer it. If you make the effort to explain your difficulty with communication, others will appreciate the situation and be more accommodating. But if you start throwing accusations around, I'm afraid it can get pretty lonely here pretty fast.

Then maybe you could take it up with him. There was no need to quote me. The way it was spelled out in that post implied that I should only focus on your questions.

Earl Grey quoted my comment, and I found that there was something I wanted to respond to. I don't see why you have an issue with that, and also, what is so bs about replying to someone that I often engage with here? Just because I haven't had the opportunity to reply yet does not mean your query's being ignored. Im actually taking the time to consider your questions, but if you're unhappy with the response time, then I'm inclined to let each of us go our merry way. You do your thing, and I'll do mine. No need for tantrums.

In that case, it can prove challenging and even counterproductive. But the most important consideration (for me) is sincerity on the OP's part. Sometimes a person wants to learn, but is unable to articulate clearly his position and needs. As long as they are open and sincere, and not taking liberties with those who offer input, maybe in time he might gain the necessary confidence to step out of some of the self-imposed limitations that I'm sensing is his/her present obstacle. I could be mistaken. Someone with your level of cultivation as a guide might be just the ticket. (with a bit of patience of course)

Are you in the position to meditate all day long? What does 'meditation' mean to you? As for the rest of the questions you seem to struggle with, Im not sure if you're being serious.

"Laying there" is still a "doing", no? (Btw, how many people do you know that died from bingeing on Netflix? this is a joke btw) All those states you mentioned are relative to stimuli, and dualistic in nature. Without a particular stimuli, that feeling relative to it does not arise. So these sensations basically exist interdependently, and they all have degrees of manifestation. At which point within their spectrum of felt manifestation/inversion does "doing" or "not doing" occur? The organs functioning now within that psycho-physical temporal structure that you identify as "my body".... Even if you choose to not "act" out of a belief in how content you are, essentially, this structure is calibrated to constant work mode, regardlessly and independent of your influence. So, when you say "Not do anything", what exactly did you mean, or what, in your opinion, constitutes "no action"?

I believe they do (manifest differently to people based on their cultural background.) Thats why the Tibetan iconography (of enlightened beings) literally contains tens of thousands of images. This is to cater for all levels/types of archetypal resonances that practitioners can tap into. Traditionalists will probably disagree, but thats okay. My teacher disagrees with all static/fixated premises. She said it doesn't make sense to deaden the mind by imposing restrictions when the main purpose of practice is to release the mind gently into its empty nature. Ultimately, freedom is to be free of extremes, and if this is the goal, then one must recognize that what teachers provide as tools for practice are simply that.... expedients for maturing the practice. If a practitioner insists that a mandala has to be this way or that, and that its wrong to include, for eg, Jesus Christ (and other non-Buddhist archetypes) within the mandala, then the whole purpose of the practice is missed. Not only will Sukhavati manifest differently to Westerners - in essence, it should manifest uniquely to each practitioner's karmic path. For example, a Buddhist practitioner's mandala may be imbued with symbols of the swastika and other auspicious symbols, whereas a Christian who adopts vajrayana practice is free to work with auspicious Christian symbols when creating his/her mandala. Or not. If they are not ready to manifest such a mandala to enhance their journey towards enlightenment, thats fine too. Any particular reason why you do not agree with the idea that Guan Yin and Tara share the same representations?

If you don't do anything, what is there to accept and/or reject?

What did you mean by "getting to know ourselves" in the context of tantra? Thats an interesting perspective, and not one I hear often. I'd rather not second guess, so an expansion on that would be appreciated. And... why did you regard relaxing into the natural state (non grasping wisdom, as you said) to be a hassle? Another very interesting observation indeed.

Hey Virtue... welcome back Using the term 'non-tantric' refers to the outer aspect of Chenrezig practice that is considered 'open' and informal. The inner path (loosely exemplified as visualizing Chenrezig rising from the heart chakra to the crown) and the innermost path (visualizing oneself as Chenrezig), being more formalized, would be the tantric elements I was referring to. I'm not aware that a Chenrezig empowerment is a prerequisite even at the latter stages of the innermost path, unlike, for example, the yidams of anuttarayoga tantra... Chakrasamvara, Hevajra, Vajrayogini (mother tantras), or Yamantaka and Guhyasamaja (father tantras), which are all off limits without empowerments, even at the generation stages. I'm open to correction on this. I don't believe Chenrezig is classified under either of the above tantric family of deities. Again, open to correction.

Not necessarily the most correct because how the visualization is effected is contingent upon one's stage on the path. Since Chenrezig practice is non-tantric and does not require empowerment (the earliest mention of the mantra of Chenrezig is found in the Karandavyuha sutra, which isn't a tantric text), its practice forms are quite flexible. There's absolutely nothing wrong with your current practice. For those who've taken tantric vows, however, they would be performing the visualizations differently, thats all. Berzin Archives is a reliable resource, and if you're interested to gain a deeper view of tantric visualizations, Alex Berzin expounds it extensively here https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/vajrayana/tantra-theory/visualization-practice-in-tantra Also this, for perspective: https://buddhaweekly.com/tantra-helps-stop-ordinary-perception-the-fast-path-to-enlightenment-but-how-do-modern-buddhists-relate-to-deities/ According to Vajrayana, that vagueness you mentioned is due to the layers of mental coverings. As your practice progresses, its said these coverings form 'scabs' and eventually peel off. One reliable yardstick to measure how much progress has been made is the increasing clarity and refinement that arises with the visualizations, and to what extent does that clarity persists in the mindstream is also a factor. A beginner might only be able to hold a fuzzy image of Chenrezig for a couple of minutes at a time, whereas a more mature practitioner might be able to capture in his mind's eye all the intricacies and subtle details of a Chenrezig thangka for a lengthy period without being distracted. Such stability is crucial because it prepares the mind for what arises at the onset of the dying bardo. So, in essence, no matter which deity practice one does, its best to stick unwaveringly to one for the whole of one's life and really drive it deep so that it appears to you in waking states and in dream states, and finally, it will appear resolutely at the point of transition from this life into the intermediate bardo, which, according to Vajrayana, is what crowns one's practice. That is the very moment where liberation can happen. This is clearly explained in all the Bardo Thodol texts and commentaries. Excellent resource for the various texts here - https://www.lotsawahouse.org/topics/dying-bardos/

Thank you, @Vajra Fist. It sounds like your practice has reached a fairly stable phase. Another question, if I may... At any point, do you visualize yourself as Chenrezig? If not, Do you perhaps generate aspirational prayers to invoke Chenrezig at the start of the session, followed by visualizing a fully adorned, iridescent, rainbow-coloured Chenrezig, first seated on a thousand-petalled ivory-colored translucent lotus within the heart space, then as your aspirations gain fervour, you become aware of Chenrezig, still seated on the lotus, rising up along the central channel to the crown area?

∞ BASSUI ∞ mud and water There are others who eliminate all thoughts making their minds calm and composed. They think that the path of no-mind means that their minds are perfectly clear and cheerful. Still, others revel in form to the extreme, love manner and decorum far beyond the behavior of others, and seek the way to gain merit. Or, not having the mind that seeks the Way, others become interested in fame. They desire proof of their attainment from a good teacher, and if they don't receive it, they scornfully denounce the teacher. Or, believing in the law of cause and effect in all situations, some feel that even their failure to realize the Buddha Way is a result of past karma. They say they do not have the karmic connection with the Way and will not become enlightened in this lifetime while trying to exhaust all bad karma of previous lives by performing various practices of self-abandonment. They make pilgrimages to shrines and temples to gain spiritual merit, recite diverse incantations, count prayer beads, and make hundreds of prostrations, praying for the mind that seeks the Way. These people, in particular, are of extremely low aptitude. All these people fear life and death. They are sick in the mind - a sickness that occurs when one seeks the Way while not yet having developed correct views. Bad as they are, however, they don't compare with those who have no fear of life and death and yet do not seek the Way.

Im just curious and have a question for mantra practitioners - Where does related visualization practices fit into your routine? Haven't seen it mentioned, unless it was somehow missed.

What have you got to lose? He asked... lol I wonder if he asked Miller's wife to take HCQ https://www.salon.com/2020/05/09/trumps-desperate-hours-he-was-contemptuous-of-the-virus--now-it-has-him-trapped/?fbclid=IwAR23btZ9Dqdsq32_5bjnHVluTzWa6eBQoqiAGb_VhKurqshiqNBsHfuJPds

She was fact-checked, and found to have lied not long after that promise went out. ... in that same briefing.

That new press sec called mass testing 'nonsensical'. lol

Younger folks best not to practice semen retention. Nature didn't intend for such a transformative practice to be cultivated until maybe between the ages of 40 to 55. This is just the way of things - part of the blueprint that determines dos and donts for the human species. Timing is an essential part of this blueprint. Thats why in India, serious spiritual cultivation dont usually happen until folks pass 60. Focus of the first 50 odd years directed at mundane duties. They are in total acceptance that spiritual cultivation cannot be rushed.