rebelrebel

No, it's your opinion that those were just angry insults solely for the purpose of hurting. Don't confuse opinion with reality. Maybe the poster was trying to help? Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions there Ghandi

I have to chime in here. First of all, get off your high horse and quit pretending like you never get angry. Do you think that compassion means always being nice and kind? No, sometimes it means being rough and not beating around the bush. It means calling somebody stupid when they are being stupid so they can become smart. Telling it like it is.

Hmmm well why do you care about creeping them out? I'm not sure if you're talking about a girl here but from the responses that seems to be the case. Anyway, if that is the case, just tell her what YOU think Taoism is. Don't be afraid to just say what you want. Just let it out. Just think, If she is creeped out by a simple explanation of your beliefs straight from your heart, then why would you want to associate yourself with her anyway?

Of course it is possible to know things. Remember the classic situation: if you say you can't know anything then you have just refuted yourself because you know that you can't know anything.

Hmm yes I see what you are saying here. The I in actuality is not existent, not non existent, not both and not neither. So really, truly, nothing can be said about it in the end. So the "I", the doer, the controller since all these or the notions of these arise dependently on causes and conditions they have never been any of the four extremes. So to say they were originally in any of the four extremes would be wrong. Best not to say anything. That feels more free to me than just simply to say "it is and always has been non existent."

Beautiful. What more do you need in life?

Cool Vajra. I like your response.

This is an interesting subject to me. A lot of the time in traditions, realization or enlightenment is equated with the dropping of the I. Now personally for me, I don't see that much of a problem with the I. it just gives one stability and something to center oneself in in reality. Anyways, I see "I" as referring to my individual body and mind. What is wrong with that? Some say that there really is no chooser/controller and no doer. Of course there is. The mind itself is the chooser/controller, it's very nature is to choose and control and the body is the doer (probably mind too). My life was a lot better before I got into all this "get rid of the I" stuff when I actually cared about having some sort of identity and stable personality. I could interact with people better, I had more interest in life. Now it just seems so...empty. And not empty in a good way. Real or not, I'm considering living through the I again. What are your thoughts on the I?

Xabir, you constantly speak in cryptic language that is impenetrable to a common person such as myself. I'm sorry dude but I have not understood a word of what you have just said. Now you speak of all objects being within a container like awareness yet you constantly expressed to thuscomeone that he was wrong when he tried to explain things in the same way, when he basically said the same thing. I'm sorry man but just what in the hell are you on about?

Thanks Vajra Krishnamurti also frequently said this. But I don't want to get into that again...

Hmm I will probably check this out. One more question, suppose someone did not know all the particulars of emanating and all that but just knew the way things are and thus was able to gain liberation at death? Would such a person/mindstream/whatever they were at that point just remain in a confused state of limbo for all of eternity ? Are there buddhas in the place that this mindstream/person has gone who can or do teach emanation?

Could you expand on this?

Hmm well my understanding of buddhahood/liberation is that one recognizes the true nature of things (emptiness appearances inseperability) and then, at death, when the clear light dawns, one recognizes the light as the pure dharmakaya (emptiness) and is liberated from the cycle of being reborn and thus is able to benefit all beings endlessly for all time.

And how does one really manifest buddhahood vajra? One more question, it is said that Milarepa attained buddhahood in one lifetime. What exactly is the status of a human being who has done such a thing while still alive? What would Mila have had to have done to achieve buddhahood or as you say, "manifest" it?