C T

The intention to relief other beings' suffering forms the basis for the bodhisattva ideal. At the level of intention, one is responsible and can succeed only in reducing personal karmic propensities, but not limited or restricted in the cultivation of an altruistic mindset that mimics that of enlightened bodhisattvas who possess infallible clairvoyant ability to fully 'see' beings' past, present and future karma, and can therefore act with unmistaken altruism. This is a serious accomplishment, with immense implications. Until aspiring bodhisattvas attain to that permanent stability, 'burning other beings' karma' is solely performed at the level of intention, as indicated above. To do otherwise is folly, but it does not mean one cannot 'act as if' one is already a mahasattva bodhisattva, provided one adheres to the guidelines laid down in the bodhisattva vows.

There's a similar concept in Christian theology as well, although its clear there is a marked contrast in application/practicalities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasury_of_merit

There are many references to a 'storehouse of merit' in various Vajrayana texts and commentaries. For example, in Lama Tsongkapa's Steps To Enlightenment: "When you compose or recite a homage to these worthy objects, you create a great storehouse of merit. This is the positive potential and good fortune that enables you to avoid or overcome obstacles." Elsewhere... "Ever enhancing your enlightened motive of bodhicitta is the mainstay of the path of the supreme Yana. It is the basis and the foundation for the great tide of altruistic conduct. Like an elixir which produces gold, it turns everything into the two treasures of merit and insight, forming a storehouse of merit gleaned from infinitely collected virtues." In the Lalita-vistara Sutra it is said, "The fruit of meritorious action is happiness and the elimination of all suffering. Those who possess merit will be able to accomplish their goals. Conquering the maras, they quickly reach enlightenment and attain the fruit of nirvana, the peace that cools the fire of suffering." Its difficult to expand on the concept to non- Vajrayana practitioners. These points are often misconstrued and tend to be taken too literally. For example, the mere mention of 'containment' was enough to cause confusion, let alone lengthier discourse on the subject. Those who genuinely want to understand can further their own research. Lama Tsongkhapa's work cited above is a good starting point. But I doubt there'll be much interest.

that is the simplistic understanding, but there's a depth to it that only becomes clear after one has immersed in the direct experience of being in a consecrated space. Its like someone you share presence with, they might experience a certain wave of energetic transformation taking place, but this energetic impulse needs some kind of containment if it is to retain efficacy, otherwise it can be lost thru leakages. Locking in merit means having some form of assurance that the containment is secure so that leakages are minimised/plugged. Asking if we hide merit behind a shield seems like a disingenuous question, but it may be because you actually did not grasp what im saying. If the question was genuine, it need not have to be tinged with innuendo and what seems like sarcasm even. Or maybe the meaning wasn't clear enough - if thats the case, its my fault for misunderstanding the underlying intent behind your questions.

In Vajrayana, as mentioned in a previous post, shielding serves a dual purpose - besides keeping negative energies at bay, it locks in accrued merit & virtue, combined as propensities for enlightenment. Like a blanket - keeps out the cold, keeps in the warmth, simultaneously. One action, two results.

So the power of the mantra remains the same, just the awareness of its usage has transcended? Likewise, shielding (categorically, a mantra is a type of protective shield, as you know) can be employed within the exact same awareness, and not necessarily have anything to do with fear or other lesser motives. Its got very little to do with being afraid actually, but i can understand the convenience involved when choosing to connect shielding with a fear-based motive.

But yet you still believe in the efficacy of mantra, yes?

We all practice shielding in some form of another, its just that some of these forms are so close to our nose that we no longer think of it in the same way it is encouraged in serious spiritual work. In essence, the practice of shielding in spiritual work is no different than putting a blanket over oneself at bed time. Its not just for keeping warm - even in warmer climates people still wrap up. As one falls asleep, the body gradually stills as the mind moves from one dimension to another, and with the help of a cover over the body, this transition is made in a way to allow or help the mind move out and then return safely and in the best possible way, because if it does not, then all kinds of agitations will tend to occur, and one will fail to get a restful sleep. Its basically the same principle at work in spiritual practice - yet there is a rejection of one and a favouring of the other, when in actual fact both are equally practical and applicable.

You're free to interpret it in whichever way fits best with your current path, Tom. Im drawing comparisons in the same way that you make comments on certain Vajrayana practices, even though you are not a practitioner. I may have been critical a few times over what i recognised as inaccuracies and debated with you on that, but i dont think i had ever said you had no right to your interpretation. I hope you can extend that same courtesy likewise. My intention is not to instil fear (or at least not a bunch of them) but i can understand how it can be misconstrued according to selective interpretations. As mentioned, im only presenting how energetic practices, guru yoga and yidam (deity) practices are systematically cultivated in the tradition I follow. And no, Im not debating about shields, although they are extremely helpful and even crucial. Not only in Vajrayana, but in almost all serious esoteric/occult pursuits. You might want to read up on mandalas, pentagrams, symbolisms, protective shields, site consecrations, etc. to maybe get a clearer understanding of what Im pointing to. Im sure some of the members who follow this thread can see well that promoting fear was the least of my motive.

He has some senior students who contribute regularly over at Dharmawheel.. perhaps you can check with them. From my own findings, the meaning is clear.

Yes Im familiar with that verse. It was directed to Buddhist practitioners in general who wanted to know what to make of all the different teachings found in all the different Buddhist traditions, some of which appears contradictory. So he responded accordingly.

And thanks for yours. I can appreciate where you're coming from. I think Norbu Rinpoche might have made that specific comment in the context of the different Buddhist yanas and the array of teachings found within each of these vehicles. Its easy to take it out of context to assume he meant it some other way. Intuition have its limits, and are often subjected to individual biases. As for dangerous paths, if obvious signs are there and there's still the insistence to proceed anyway, then thats whats needed for the lesson, I guess. Freedom is an all-inclusive gift which is bestowed equally on those who are right and also those who are wrong.

It can be prudent when equally matched with a kind of healthy scepticism - one that can mature over time without turning one into a cynic in the process. Cynicism is a highly contractive state, as that TTC quote you posted indicates. In Vajrayana, initiates are made aware of the importance of allowing ample time to test the teacher, for however long it takes, some even up to 9 years, or until a complete trust in the relationship is cemented before taking it to the next level. This is a prerequisite for authentic guru yoga. To progress confidently in guru yoga it is best that all traces of doubt be erased prior. I think the post i made which you quoted above clearly explained my position with regards to the limitations of such prudence in certain facets of life, especially those involving remote interactions and on-line energetic exchanges. In case of misunderstanding, let me state again that its not my intention to lessen the validity of any group or the kind of practices these groups conduct. I have no idea of specifics, so what I write and comment on, derived from my involvement in Vajrayana Buddhism, naturally have a limited scope when reflected against non-Vajrayana paths. I admit to generalising some of whats commented upon, and my only objective is to present alternative considerations so that readers can make comparisons and hopefully inform themselves and draw conclusions if they so choose, in a better light.

Fundamentally there's nothing 'wrong' with such encouragements if applied in a general sense of finding a level of well-being to get on with one's life. But these are whats known as 'mundane' guides that are limited in their application. Sometimes... no, in fact, most of the time, retaining a keen sense of scepticism (around anything to do with spiritual interactions) can be extremely useful and goes some way to keep one safe. Just like when someone happens to be in a precarious neighbourhood, it is unwise to open the door trustingly and invite strangers into the house. Thats where common sense applies, and yet, in the best of times, it still happens. Not all strangers have nefarious motives, that is sure, but this is where common sense becomes helpful. Not all strangers who come calling are sincere either, yes? Thats why houses have doors - they serve a primary purpose, other than to keep out the rain and drafts, regardless of how trusting the homeowner may be. If someone offers to do a remote scan, for example, which by its very suggestion is an activity that transpires outside of the mundane, then asking someone to 'let go and trust' and for that someone to afterwards accept that suggestion based simply on that premise is foolish. The very act of 'letting go and trusting' carries with it certain vulnerabilities that transcends the mundane in the context of such an exercise. I cannot say what these vulnerabilities are, specifically - it depends on circumstantial as well as individual proclivities - a lot of psycho-spiritual traumas lie dormant, so this is another factor to bear in mind. In short, the very nature of applying umbrella terms to try and make sense of the limitless subtleties/nuances involved in non-physical transactions is not exactly sound. People will be better served adhering to authentic traditions that provide systematic and guided schemas that have been forged with precision and time-tested to prove their accuracy and dependability.

The term 'sharing presence' (and or 'merging') in this context implies some sort of supramundane engagement and activity - pursuant to this, there are implied grounds where common sense has its limits. If common sense and trust were the only basis there would not be the kind of voluminous posts found on TDB of people coming here seeking answers and seeking solutions for a variety of 'spiritual' sicknesses. Their dilemmas are real to them. Its irresponsible and disrespectful to simply brush these things aside, as if they were all figments of the individual's imagination.

Lol - - sounds like there's no basis then for all of the thousands of posts here about people encountering spiritual upheavals in their life (and also their spiritual life). Just carry on, learn to be trusting (even the 'beasts out there' somewhere?) - just let them all go, and everything will be rosy? Is that your group's modus operandi? Thats pure naivete, and an irresponsible approach considering the kind of work your group is involved in. Dont we all wish it was as plain-sailing as what is being implied here.

But we still tidy the house before welcoming guests... well, most do anyway.

lol so by that logic a doctor advising a patient on a certain medical condition must have experienced that condition before he can offer advice? The groups i have practiced with fortunately take all the necessary precautions to sanctify the space, both within the practice area and the outside environment, before each group spiritual practice takes place. This serves a dual purpose: One, to create an essentially pure environment when invoking the Dharma retinue (Lama, Yidam & Khandro) to ensure their swift blessings, and Two, to negate the potential for any incidental negative visitations or interference. As to the specific shielding modalities we use, afraid not relevant here. Each tradition have their own unique methods; moreover, different environments and group dynamics would determine the type of ritual that is needed. This is a responsibility that all authentic Vajrayana masters take seriously. After all, that is the whole function of creating a sacred mandala, without which all the rest of the path becomes moot.

Even with a steering wheel the potential for carelessness and accident is par for the course whenever one takes a car on the road. That's why there's insurance safeguards. I think anyone who participates in such sharings will be in a better place, and also better able to make informed decisions knowing what particular safeguards are in place. To expand further on the 'no' vote... Simply saying that a group or a leader of a group is guided by compassionate motives is not an effective safeguard, imo. Neither is finding a leader who seems to exude charisma, and/or possess some psychic ability(s) which are used as a basis to 'attract' participation, and in my view, the least effective and most risky factor to bear in mind is that such intimate participations are conducted in non-physical conditions. Deviant practices can often be disguised to portray something that is forthright, altruistic and without any harmful potential, and to a degree some may indeed be sincere and have pure intentions. These are often not sufficiently protective enough to ensure that the group dynamic will be shielded enough so that potential negativity, both from within the group and maybe from unintentional collision/or even a simple brushing-up against a wandering, unfriendly entity, can be absolutely avoided. This is quite crucial for many obvious reasons. Of course people can choose to disregard all the above as superstitious nonsense, but that would be quite foolish - if remote exchanges of 'presence' are indeed a reality (I think it is), then such considerations regarding incidental interceptions by unsympathetic entities cannot be ignored due to the very nature and openness of such a practice. Even if no such interference from an external force have been experienced, the very fact of a potential influence should be enough to alert the vitalness of proper shielding. Im only offering a general view here - again, not aiming it at any particular group here or elsewhere.

Thanks for taking the time to offer some feedback, Spotless. Just want to point that in the overall context of what I wrote, the 'wedge' does not reference identification with any particular malady - it was used as an umbrella analogy for the human condition known as 'discontentedness'.

The relative self i guess.

Not sure about others, but for me, dropping that identity and allowing it to remain dropped is a lifetime practice in mindfulness. It has a sneaky way to keep creeping back in thru the emergency exits

I read somewhere that explains this in detail, but i'll fumble around and try to summarise it in my own words: Its hard because most people function contractively from the lower self. The lower self is all about taking, sowing the seeds of desire.. "whats in it for me", without end. Where there is desire, 'action' (karma) is unavoidable. Actions arise and progress sequentially; in the process, it compounds other actions, which then compounds desire... on and on it goes, like a vicious cycle. This flip-flop between craving and the need for satiation is likened to a sort of 'fragmentation' that will keep reinforcing its own feeling of lack. Fragmentation is seen as a fundamental weakness that is like a wedge preventing the lower and higher self from attaining wholeness, and this sets off all kinds of other secondary disturbances. I think this fundamental sense of seeming separation is described in Sanskrit as 'Tanha' - the gnawing sensation of perpetual discomfort, not knowing the real cause of it, whereby the absence of this knowledge further drives the tendency or desire to seek for any and all means to calm the discomfort/unease. So its clear that in such cases, non-doing is practically unachievable. According to some schools of Buddhist thought, the combined application of samatha and vipassana, which forms the basis of all other Buddhist meditative exercises across all the different traditions, is the practice that helps to identify, and to keep on identifying this invisible wedge so that the increasing recognition (awareness) leads to enabling the practitioner to gradually come to accept that there is indeed a wedge there (the primary cause), and to take responsibility in acknowledging that he or she has, as a result of past actions, brought this wedge into existence, acknowledge personal responsibility for current state one is in as a result of having allowed that wedge to remain stuck in place for x length of time, and then cultivate an unhindered willingness to take responsibility for future actions that will ensure the dislodgement of it. Its said this is a sure way to get back to wholeness. Ultimately, this sense of wholeness (nirvana) replaces the previous sense of fragmentation (samsara) - and non-doing (which implies an absence of the accruement of further karma) becomes a consequence, just as karma was a consequence of the prior state.

Out shopping, Apech?