C T

The problem with me is I am unable to digest phrases like 'carrying the body and soul, while embracing the One', 'Attend fully and dont get separated'; 'co-redeemer' - all these sound quite vague to me, and there are no specific texts that one can lean on for authentic instructions, whereas in the lineage i follow there is no such vagueness - there are commentaries and specific teachings available to anyone interested enough to diligently study and apply the knowledge to reach stable realisation. No subjective interpretations are required, which reduces the potential for wrong views to arise.

In guru yoga one of the practices the neophyte learns is to 'play-act' or mimic the enlightened nature of his or her yidam. There comes a point when the mimicking ceases - thats when the actual qualities take root in the mind and begin to manifest externally, routing out samsaric patterns and neurotic tendencies along the way. This dropping away of old habits has got nothing to do with any sort of actual merging with one's yidam - it is merely a play initially where one adopts a role and try to get used to the characteristics incumbent in that role. In Tibet many of the dances performed by lamas, yogis and others are symbolic reminders of this purpose.

my participation is based off the sharing of experience and study, with the hope that it can lend perspective. I dont know what 'beating about the bush' has to do with this intent. If you dont value it, and have no counter points to offer, its not really my problem.

Are you abstained from bias then?

My intention was made clear in a couple of prior posts that practitioners will inadvertently have to pass through/experience perceived 'stuff' until they reach a certain realisation that effort, after all, is counter-productive. Prior to this they will have to maintain some sort of practice regime, which btw applies to me as well, more than anyone here. Im not in any way claiming that i have reached anywhere near stable realisation. Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point since guru yoga works from a different premise altogether, which, as Ive mentioned, aims to help with recognising that the intrinsic qualities of one's body, speech and mind and those enlightened qualities iconified by buddhas, yidams and khandros have the exact same essence.

The question i am considering is why the need to even postulate the term when doing that possibly leads to the creation of more mental activity, when the alternative, which is simply to first recognise and then maintain the resting in awareness of innate inseparability? Seeming duality is an illusion - it has no basis. It comes about due to dysfunctional or neurotic mental tendencies (which btw are also without basis but nonetheless occur as conditioned phenomena within mindstreams). Since it is without basis, speaking about merging might do not much more than to remain subservient to the ego's need to create a seeming separateness as a kind of buffering comfort activity so that one may remain within a limited field of thoughts that (imo) has all the trappings of self-delusion - i see no other usefulness in hanging on to an idea of an assumed activity which is 'mind created' and therefore has no basis in truth. The alternative, which is to resolve what inseparability really means, and finding that, to remain in that awareness, is more conducive to spiritual growth. my 2 cents.

A couple of days ago I received a pm from a user that goes by the handle 'Robert McCoy', who suggested that I'd be interested in a link entitled "The Tao of Gurdjieff". There was nothing else mentioned. It didn't feel right, and I deleted said pm without opening the link. Im curious to know if anyone else received same. Cheers.

Its not a level really. But i have a clue how the idea of levels comes about.

did you open the link?

What works for you is exactly what you need at this particular juncture. If one has a sense that obstructions are real, and have a deep sense that they are in some way presenting obstacles towards spiritual advancement, then that is exactly what needs to be worked upon in order to reach some kind of transcendence - no amount of debate will help.. its just something one has to experience, and move forward from there if possible. However, there are those who recognise that obstructions are, like everything else, mere mental fabrications, arising in dependence on the force of habitual inclinations, and which in fact has no locality nor substantiality. Since this group believe, and hopefully conclude through proper insight, that everything arise and subside in the mind, including the idea of 'Beings of light out there', then it follows that a concept such as 'actual merging' has no basis in truth, and its usefulness is limited to expedient spiritual exercises to dissolve the rigidly-held mental frames of reference which can be useful to those who cannot accept that there are other 'quicker' ways to reach the same unbounded sense of total release (from bondage, I would assume).

A friend just visited this site yesterday, and insists that when I go to Lombok, I must hop over to Bali (neighbouring island) and make a pilgrimage to this magnificently placed temple..

'Dao' as a principle is too vast to even comprehend, let alone describe, and it represents both the evident and also the ultimate relational, dynamic and all-encompassing field of existence. It is 'Bums' that give it perspective. Dont know what else to say.

my 2018 dream destination... its a deeply spiritual place, aside from the touristy aspects of it.

If I were a teacher, i will never propose the idea of merging to anyone because I see that having a sense of contraction or apparent turmoil is a result not of any real separation but simply due to a misapprehension of what is fundamentally not-two/not-one. Perhaps it will be more appropriate to speak of integration and reconciliation, of grooming the mind and sharpening awareness to point towards being mindful of dualistic tendencies, but all these do not in any way suggest that there is some type of merger involved. I think that it is important to find a valid premise, for those who favour this concept of merging - my opinion is that since the basis is already non-separate, then it follows that any proposed philosophical argument can only be validated from the view of original inseparability. If one makes a proposal in support of merging, then the logical assumption is that this individual does not ascribe to the concept of primordially pure (mind) nature, if this makes any sense.

I think its a misconception to take 'cessation of breath' literally.

Due to habitual formations and latent tendencies, the coarse mind tends to be agitated more often than remaining in its pure natural state. Chanting the right mantra(s) help to remove the potential for further agitations to fester, it shakes loose the roots of agitations that have already been formed, and also it increases the potential for reaching buddhahood. All three work integrally and simultaneously. Cause and effect are not-two! It is said that the mother of all mantras is the Prajnaparamita mantra - Gate gate paragate, parasamgate, Bodhi Svaha! (Tibetan) (Sanskrit)

In Mahayana Buddhism all the way up to Mahamudra & Dzogchen, it is said that the natural state is like a newborn baby in those who take up the practice as beginners, and meditation is a necessary spiritual nourishment, but yet there is no requirement to perform analytics each time one meditates in order to 'grow and develop' the natural state, just like there is no need to analyse and detail each feed that is given to a newborn baby. Just continue the feeding as a natural and necessary action to perform, and leave the growing to manifest in its own natural way, effortlessly. Needless to say we all know what the repercussions will be if the feeding is denied or withdrawn. In the same way, this is the main reason we meditate. In Tibetan language there isn't actually a direct translation for 'Meditation' - the term they use is 'Gom', which literally means, 'Getting used to'. So meditation is nothing other than the prime way to get used to the non-interference (with egoic taints) that is a vital aspect for allowing the natural state to gradually reveal itself and eventually shine through the clouds of dualistic habit-patterns and delusional sense dependencies. A key difference between Vajrayana and other systems then is that the budding practitioner will have been introduced and given a clear glimpse of what the natural state really is, and continuing practice is simply the means to give and to gain stability to what is commonly known as 'The View', and nothing else really. The prescribed approach is the encouragement to recognise the essential inseparability of this view and our true nature, rather than to cultivate one with an attitude of enjoining one state with another. Hence the emphasis in Vajrayana is not one of merging A to B - rather, it is to gain recognition that both A and B dependently arises, and therefore, both are fundamentally form & emptiness co-emerging and co-dissipating simultaneously. Gaining this understanding is very helpful because it is extremely empowering.

Homage to the glorious Samantabhadra! The natural state of the ground is free from complexity, And ground-appearances are rigpa-dharmakāya. The path has always been clear of effort, from the very beginning. When this nature itself is made manifest, it is the great source of freedom. The fruition is not something separate and set apart. When the result itself is present as cause, Settling completely is calm abiding (śamatha). Any sudden rising is rigpa's own radiance, And vivid awareness is insight (vipaśyanā). Directly, upon fading, there's primordial experience. Remaining genuinely is the dharmakāya, Accompanying awareness is the sambhogakāya, And the non-duality of stillness and movement is the nirmāṇakāya. This is what we call the “three-kāya rigpa.” While remaining at ease, there's no clinging to experience. Vivid movements of mind are freed, ungraspable. Liberated in vivid clarity, there's no post-meditative state of mind. This is what we call the “spontaneously present three kāyas.” Without any deliberate view, it is beyond dullness and agitation. Without deliberate meditation, it is entering the original 'womb'. Without deliberate conduct, it is free from rigid notions or ideas. One who has mastered this is a “lord among yogis.” Rigpa has always been free from conceptual elaboration. Conventions such as 'view', 'meditation' or 'conduct' and Any clinging to them is cleared, without basis or origin. Good thoughts, bad thoughts, and those in between, Without slipping into any such categorization, Are freed upon arising, without any agent to make distinctions. As long as awareness does not lose its own ground, There is no need for anything more than this. ~ Jigme Lingpa ~

From the standpoint of the mahayana/tantra scriptures, it is said nothing exists outside our own minds. Even Yeshe Tsogyal's master, Guru Padmasambhava, stressed this right from the beginning of his teachings.

There is a gross misunderstanding surrounding the idea of stilling the mind - that there is a common assumption which implies a mind empty of thoughts. To quench one's thirst, one does not deprive the body of liquids. In the same way, to reach lasting peace, one ought to feed the mind constantly with awareness - this practice is the right approach to 'recognising the real nature of mind'. When resting in awareness becomes more important than following thoughts, when that relaxed beingness becomes effortless and naturally manifested/embodied, what then occurs is the instant recognition of thoughts' empty essence, and this will allow thoughts and also the thinker to spontaneously subside with ease.

Obviously that was what he expected here, and got bitterly disappointed.

what a bitter human being

I have always spoken out about the beneficial effects of including prostrations as a regular practice.

Guru Yoga is the Heart of the Practice ~ Tulku Sherab Dorje

Thats a good example.. water poured into water. Thanks