Sunya

Cleary version right?

if you're speaking Buddhism, thats not what emptiness means. Emptiness is the condition or quality of everything. Every mental state, every phenomena, every thing, every no-thing. All empty. you have to take away everything that you think that Emptiness means and throw it away. Emptiness is not the formless, nor is it a realm, nor is it behind phenomena like a background. Nor is it a potentiality nor is it a fullness. The word 'emptiness' or 'voidness' are very lacking in description and immediately the mind attempts to grasp at some vague misunderstanding based on the word. It is the condition of everything, the base, but only as a quality. Like the blueness of sky or the wetness of water. This quality is that nothing stands by itself, independent, and nothing contains any essence or substance. This is what emptiness means. the opposite of Emptiness is not Fullness, al though it is in the English language.. not in the Buddhist language though it can be very confusing. The opposite of Emptiness would be that there is one eternal substance like God that is everything, or the opposite could be that nothing is connected and no truth exists.

Li TaoRen you are right that Theravada cannot be compared to Hinayana. there's really no such thing or school as Hinayana, as its a name that the Mahayanists came up for certain schools that existed during their time. Theravada is the only school that survived from the supposed 'Hinayana' label, but in fact Theravada can hardly be called selfish since there is much emphasis on metta or loving-kindness. nowadays though, things are more PC (Politically Correct), and Tibetans generally look at Hinayana not as Smaller Vehicle but more like walking down a razors edge, very straight and small path, which is due to the many restrictions and rules which are meant to stop people from commiting negative acts/thoughts. Monks especially have these rules, vows, or vinaya or discipline and that is because Mahayana is inseperable from Hinayana. Tibetans also start out with Hinayana because they view mastery of Hinayana to be necessary before Mahayana, and the latter before Vajrayana. like a step by step program. but Theravada is not the Hinayana of the Tibetans. Theravada I feel is a much vaster school than its given credit for. This PDF might be interesting to some http://www.abhayagiri.org/index.php/main/book/138/ Small Boat, Great Mountain Theravādan Reflections on The Natural Great Perfection Ajahn Amaro reflects on the teachings of The Natural Great Perfection from the Dzogchen teachings and compares it with those familiar in the Pali Canon and in the Thai Forest Tradition.

thank you for sharing, its truly motivating and wonderful to read, and extremely useful for me in this period of my life...

my friend you are taking what I say personally, I am only having a discussion with you

Magitek, Every goal you are given is not yours since we are all interdependent. There is no such thing as creativity or originality because there is no way to actually create something that was not influenced by others. Interconnection. the loftier goals I speak of are the goals of pre-alchemical Taoism. read Laozi and Chuanzi and then read Cleary's translation of Golden Flower, it's very much in line with original Taoism before people started worrying about converting energies. If you just want to be healthy and live a good life, then yes JJ's writings are great for you. But some people gain a deeper awareness of how the mind works, and see that being healthy and living life just isn't enough, why? because you would still be stuck in dualism and will suffer. If you don't think you suffer, or don't yearn for deeper realization of the subtle truths of life and don't want to experience something beyond this wretched material existence, then yes these loftier goals are not for you.

i've read JJ's books, he's a wonderful person with a really interesting story and a good method. with that said, my opinion is that what he awakened with his breathing exercises, as he was trying to become a better jazz saxaphonist it happened spontaneously, were leftover effects stemming from past life accumulations. I do not think that there can be one method for everyone, we each have our own karmas, our own past causes to our present effects For some, awakening this energy really can be as simple as bringing energy up the spine and letting go for the ride. But not for most. I also think, having read Cleary's translation, that its a much deeper technique. Awakening kundalini energy is only on the level of energy, which may be the goal of Wilhelm's translation. Who knows about the original, not me, my chinese sucks, but I feel Cleary is closer.and that his translation is definitely pointing to a deeper realization since it is on the level of mind, and actually goes beyond dualistic mind so its very deep. Turning the light around as per Cleary is about remaining in non-conceptual open and clear awareness, very much like Mahamudra. Cleary explains in the notes exactly where Wilhelm mistranslated certain parts and how that led to a completely different book. Cleary is known as a great translator, and has done many works. not only do I trust his translation more, but I can see intuitively that the methods presented in Cleary's translation are much deeper than Wilhelms and lead to a deeper realization. no offense meant to JJ, his goal seems to be health and balance. and circulating energy is great for that, but for those who have loftier goals, I very much recommend the Cleary translation. you seem very attached to what you term Inner Alchemy and view it as necessary, as the only method, to a goal which you've yet to try to conceptualize. It's a good idea to know where you're going. What you say about Cleary's translation as simply a starting point is not true. This practice is not based on the dualistic mind, a practice just to tame thoughts..no.. it goes far beyond that. It goes beyond dualistic mind. It would be helpful to study Buddhism to understand what Clearly's translation is pointing to. It seems far more Buddhist than Taoist to me. You think that refining energies is what needs to be done, what if I told you this refinement is a side-effect of deeper workings and can be avoided? what if I told you that these energies, all of them, are all dependent on Mind? I'm not saying that alchemy isn't good, it is very helpful to speed things up by refining energy, but being active in the process is not necessary. Mind is where it's all at; the beginning and the end. Going beyond dualistic mind is a far deeper practice than refining energies and clearing channels.

men don't cry! you need to cowboy up

wonderful *___*

interesting avatar scotty

dude its called tough love. i'm pokin and prodding him to get him to open up and question his fixed views. and i'm not attacking him, i'm poking at his repeated patterns of clinging to a view thats been debated over for months but he won't budge. there is no 'him' that i'm attacking. there are only fixed grasping at a view (his end) and poking torwards a more thorough understanding to help dispel fantasy (from this end). this is no I and there is no Dwai. hey that rhymes!

dwai, let me respond for you. "but I want to be right! I can't be wrong! Vedanta and Buddhism have to be the same. they HAVE TO! or else....or else... i have to question my beliefs... NOOOOOO"

Real Buddhists follow the teachings of the Buddha, not blindly, but at first through logical reasoning and then gaining insight beyond logic. and the Buddha taught, as time and time again we have to repeat for you Dwai, that grasping at an ultimate reality or an ultimate subject that encompasses everything is a Samsaric path. Nargarjuna said the same thing, and so does Dalai Lama as VH quoted before. so basically, Buddha, Nargarjuna, and the DL are not real Buddhists. Interesting. Who are these "Real Buddhists" ?

hey King. nice name, whats it mean? what kind of meditation / energy work do you do? if you're cultivating the seed, I hope you're doing some sort of practice to open the channels like Qi Gong. doesn't have to be mantak chia-like where you move energy around. You could just stand in a posture. check out "Zhan Zhuang", you can start with the basic Wuji stance and then once you're comfortable do the 'embracing the ball' stance. This is a really practical posture that is very effective, and others here can vouch for how good it is. Proper posture is key though. maybe find a Qi Gong or Tai Chi teacher to help you with posture. while you hold the posture you can just do belly breathing and let go. I think the book "Way of Energy" is really good for this, others can find some free resources on these postures for you though as I don't know any. I would also really recommend vipassana meditation which allows you to experience emotions, desires, feelings, energy free of attachment. the mind very habitually follows feelings. I know this to be true, its so hard to transcend these impulses, especially sexual ones. but practicing Vipassana is wonderful as you dehabituate and essentially gain freedom from the habits of mind impulses. (you have Adobe Reader right? its free to download) http://www.interactivebuddha.com/Insight%2...egal%20size.pdf I feel that these practices will really help you. the standing posture will help open channels so that sexual energy can transmute into more refined energy, and vipassana will help with mind cravings which also is a problem when it comes too much sexual desire. you would be tackling this issue from two levels, mind, and energy. focusing on just one level is slower than working on both. there is also body.. and though standing posture is good for body, you could implement dynamic structure such as hatha yoga or tai chi, some sort of movement and then you'll be working mind, energy, and body and that would be perfect. but since you seem like a busy dude, you can start with 20-30 minutes (start with 10 till you can handle it) of standing meditation and 30 minutes of vipassana, per day. increase if you see fit. Oh I forgot and you can do vipassana while you do the standing meditation, or you can save vipassana for later and completely let go, whatever you want to do. I'd recommend just completely letting go during standing posture and try to completely relax and let whatever thoughts, feelings, desires come forth and just be. you can do vipassana sitting down and also take it with you to work and throughout your day (this will happen naturally too) Good luck

yeah like every Buddhist out there including Buddha himself. so intellectually challenged those Buddhists are... can't even understand their own religion!

I hope you do better research than you did in your Buddhism and Vedanta quest

http://www.amazon.com/Cutting-Spiritual-Ma...s/dp/0877730504

wow crazy video, especially at 14:20

I think that its really necessary to train in shamata (concentration) and vipassana (bare awareness) techniques before one decides to explore other realms. The reason being, Shamata meditation allows you to train your will and intent, this focus is necessary, and Vipassana allows you to see your emotions as sensations and you don't get caught up in them. Intent and emotions are very important when going out of body. as Glenn Morris says over and over again in his books, like attracts like, and if you're in a state of fear you will attract beings of that vibrational quality. Steam, if you train in Shamata meditating on the breath, and Vipassana, bare witnessing, the next time you go out of body you will be much better prepared. and you will have nothing to fear. as long as you project positive feelings such as compassion, no negative being can hurt you. they feed of negative energy like fear. http://www.mro.org/zmm/teachings/meditation.php http://www.deepspring.org/images/vipassana...tructionsJJ.pdf

you didn't get enough satisfaction posting as jesusfreak? or, hell, even if that wasn't you, you're still just another angry sarcastic twit. If you truly do have Gurus ask what sarcasm and anger does to your channels.

my opinion is that great compassion comes with Arhat realization and that when one becomes an Arhat, one essentially becomes a Bodhisattva. this actually isn't just my opinion but also how some Mahayana teachers say it. Its also obvious from people who are on the spiritual path that compassion is a natural by product of releasing negativities and obscurations. so I think that the Bodhisattva is a natural progress of the Arhat.

well Arhat is the goal of Theravada school of Buddhism, Buddhahood is the goal of Mahayana school of Buddhism, including Vajrayana or Tantric Buddhism. Arhat is something like a 1st or 2nd level Bodhisattva, there are different levels or bhumis of Bodhisattvas. As I was taught by a Tibetan teacher, "Liberation" is what an Arhat strives for, this being the removal of obscurations and defilements. Karma and Delusion being the primary ones. the 3 higher trainings are used which are ethics, concentration, and wisdom. basically, realizing no-self and emptiness. Enlightenment or Buddhahood is different than Liberation but it includes it. This is removal of obscurations and defilements PLUS knowledge of obscurations (Omniscience) which comes from having Bodhicitta (wish to get enlightened for all Beings) Theravada acknowledges that Arhat is a lesser goal but views it as more realistic. Buddhahood is seen as a goal that is beyond the reach of ordinary men. so they are going towards the more realistic goal of Arhat.

why don't you ask one?

you make a good point. the Tibetan Canon basically contains all of the Theravada as well as the Mahayana, and of course the Vajrayana. they are able to have so many different viewpoints without argument because they are able to see each in its respective context. You cannot take one sutra like the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, take some quotes, and discard the rest of the Mahayana teachings. you also cannot take this sutra out of context and not understand the audience that the sutra was meant for. This particular Sutra was meant for people who grasp at an eternal self and need that sort of teaching. It is skillful means, and paradoxical like much of Buddhist teaching, because since Buddha Nature is just potentiality like a hidden seed, how can one call that a self and identify with that potentiality? theres no substance to potentiality, its an abstraction. just like how you cant' say I am compassion, or I am wisdom. this is sort of like the methods of Vajrayana where dieties are used and one identifies with what they represent. What they truly represents are abstractions and one cannot grasp at those since there is nothing there.