Simple_Jack

Check with Alwayson? Screw that guy, he's not an authority on Buddhism. I'm sure the monks in training for their Geshe degree at Sera Je monastery or wherever, would be able to wipe him across the floor in debate. Hey, if the Dalai Lama thinks Tsongkhapa's version of madhyamaka is good enough to propagate: then I'm sure it's just as viable of an approach to non-conceptual realization of emptiness. Let's not continue in the vein of the triumphant sectarianism that Tibetan Buddhism is known for. Thinking about it now, I know that I've also come across Chinese commentators of madhyamaka explaining emptiness in the same terms as Tsongkhapa.

There's always those who put aside religious differences in order to help those in times of distress: Buddhist monastery protects Muslim refugees in Myanmar - http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=51,11488,0,0,1,0#.UdDUS9jhejl

1. I'm not Geoff (Jnana) 2. Shankara didn't understand Buddhism. It's quite clear once you unbiasedly compare and contrast his arguments to the source material for his formulations. 3. Madhyamaka had a significant influence on Advaita Vedanta. 4. You don't understand the premise for the Buddha's teaching on the 5 aggregates and its relation to the 12 links of dependent origination. 5. The Pali canon are not the oldest available texts. Those would be from the Gandhari texts which have been translated into a part of the Chinese Agamas.

Are you serious? You said you have received these teachings before. Why do you think specific pujas are done for the deceased so that they can be reborn in a pure land? You're associating this with astral projection and the ability to possess a corpse which are regular siddhis (the latter you can read about in this book http://www.amazon.com/books/dp/1559392991). The main goal(s) of phowa is to either become enlightened in the intermediate period after death or to be reborn in a pure land (which exist separately from the 3 realms). Like how I mentioned above: you can help guide sentient beings at the moment of death to a pure land, through specific means. Also, I found another website to an Anyen Rinpoche who teaches phowa courses: http://www.phowafoundation.org/ This will you give a bit more information on phowa: http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Phowa

Bon also has it's own lineages of terma teachings from tertons such as Vairocana and Padmasambhava (who are also associated with Buddhism).

Bon teachings are said to have originated (on this planet) from a buddha called Tonpa Shenrab, so technically Bon is a Mahayana doctrine descended from buddhas (not to mention that their organizational structure and teachings are modeled after Vajrayana; effectively making them a "buddhist" sect of sorts). Please, enlighten me as to other non-Buddhist traditions which have teachings on rebirth in a pure buddhafield. I'm not referring to long-lived god realms nor the pure abodes of non-returners.

So, your basically saying that Padmasambhava, Longchenpa or Chogyal Namkhai Norbu have propagated a mistaken delusional doctrine and are actually themselves deluded? That's not true. The Pali canon and Chinese Agamas have teachings where Buddha expounds sunyata. I posted some examples of sunyata in the Pali canon here: http://thetaobums.com/topic/26853-sunyata-in-the-pali-cannon/#entry400687 http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=4767 Lazy_eye wrote:My interest was sparked by (among other things) these three sutras from the agamas. The first one corresponds closely to the Pali Canon's Sunna Sutta with a notable exception: it includes the formulation "empty of eternal and unchanging nature" which sounds like it came straight out of Nagarjuna. It's pretty standard Nikāya era language. For example, see the Pāli Paṭisambhidāmagga Suññatākathā, where each of the twelve sensory spheres (āyatanā) are said to be "empty of a self or that which belongs to a self or of what is permanent and everlasting and eternal and not subject to change." Lazy_eye wrote:Wondering if there are similar interesting discrepancies elsewhere, and what they signify -- did something get added into the Chinese version, or taken out of the Pali? Doctrinally, all of the early texts are very similar. The only major differences are in word choice and how the basic pericopes are strung together to form larger units, and then how these larger units of sūtras are arranged into Āgamas/Nikāyas. Check out Four Gāndhārī Saṃyuktāgama Sūtras (and the other publications in this series) for a detailed comparison of issues regarding Indic, Chinese, and Tibetan languages, Āgama arrangement, etc. All the best, Geoff https://sites.google.com/site/santifm10/ThreeEmptinessSutras.pdf?attredirects=0 samiddhi-suññata-veyyākaraṇa The Answer to Samiddhi on Emptiness SA 232 evaṁ me sutaṁ.i ekaṁ samayaṁ bhagavā sāvatthiyaṁ viharati jetavane anāthapiṇḍikassa ārāme. atha kho āyasmā samiddhi yena bhagavā ten’upasaṅkami, upasaṅkamitvā bhagavantaṁ abhivādetvā ekam-antaṁ nisīdi, ekam-antaṁ nisinno kho āyasmā samiddhi bhagavantaṁ etad-avoca. Thus have I heard. Once the Blessed One was dwelling at Sāvatthi in Jeta’s Grove Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. Then the venerable Samiddhi approached the Blessed One, having approached and bowed down he sat to one side. Sitting to one side the venerable Samiddhi said this to the Blessed One: suñño loko’ti bhante vuccati. kittāvatā nu kho bhante suñño loko’ti. ‘Empty is the world’ it is said, bhante. In what way, bhante, is the world said to be empty? bhagavā etad-avoca. The Blessed One said this: cakkhuṁ, samiddhi, suññaṁ attenaii vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. The eye is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. rūpā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāmadhammena vā. Form is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. cakkhu-viññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Eye-consciousness is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. yam-p’idaṁ cakkhu-sampassa-paccayā uppajjati vedayitaṁ dukkhaṁ vā sukhaṁ vā adukkham-asukhaṁ vā tam-pi suññaṁ, suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vāiii. Also what is felt as pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure nor pain that arises dependent on eye-contact that too is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. sotaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. The ear is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. saddā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāmadhammena vā. Sounds are empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. sota-viññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Ear-consciousness is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. yam-p’idaṁ sota-sampassa-paccayā uppajjati vedayitaṁ dukkhaṁ vā sukhaṁ vā adukkham-asukhaṁ vā tam-pi suññaṁ, suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Also what is felt as pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure nor pain that arises dependent on ear-contact that too is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. ghānaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. The nose is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. gandhā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Smells are empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. ghāna-viññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Nose-consciousness is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. yam-p’idaṁ ghāna-sampassa-paccayā uppajjati vedayitaṁ dukkhaṁ vā sukhaṁ vā adukkham-asukhaṁ vā tam-pi suññaṁ, suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Also what is felt as pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure nor pain that arises dependent on nose-contact that too is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. jivhā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāmadhammena vā. The tongue is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. rasā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāmadhammena vā. Tastes are empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. jivhā-viññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Tongue-consciousness is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. yam-p’idaṁ jivhā-sampassa-paccayā uppajjati vedayitaṁ dukkhaṁ vā sukhaṁ vā adukkham-asukhaṁ vā tam-pi suññaṁ, suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Also what is felt as pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure nor pain that arises dependent on tongue-contact that too is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. kāyo suñño attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāmadhammena vā. The body is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. photthabbā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Touches are empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. kāya-viññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Body-consciousness is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. yam-p’idaṁ kāya-sampassa-paccayā uppajjati vedayitaṁ dukkhaṁ vā sukhaṁ vā adukkham-asukhaṁ vā tam-pi suññaṁ, suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Also what is felt as pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure nor pain that arises dependent on nose-contact that too is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. mano suñño attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāmadhammena vā. The mind is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. dhammā suññā attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Mental objects are empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. mano-viññāṇaṁ suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. Mind-consciousness is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. yam-p’idaṁ mano-sampassa-paccayā uppajjati vedayitaṁ dukkhaṁ vā sukhaṁ vā adukkham-asukhaṁ vā tam-pi suññaṁ, suññaṁ attena vā attāniyena vā sassatâvipariṇāma-dhammena vā. taṁ kissa hetu. dhammatā esā bhikkhave Also what is felt as pleasure, pain and neither-pleasure nor pain that arises dependent on mind-contact that too is empty, empty of self, empty of what belongs to a self, and empty of eternal and unchanging nature. tasmātiha suñño loko’ti vuccati. Therefore ‘empty is the world’ is said. idam-avoca bhagavā. āyasmato samiddhi bhagavato bhāsitaṁ abhinanduṁ. This was said by the Blessed One. The venerable Samiddhi delighted in the Blessed One’s words.

You have a chance of learning this from Ayang Rinpoche who teaches phowa from the Nyingma and Drikung Kagyu lineages: http://ayangrinpoche.org/2013-north-america-teaching-schedule-announced/ He's been going around teaching this for some years now. This should be moved back to the Buddhist sub-forum: 1. So it won't get lost in the General Forum. 2. Because phowa is directly tied to bardo experiences of the Pure Lands, which is a Buddhist Mahayana theme (e.g. sukhavati or the pure land of Guru Rinpoche).

An excerpt from an article I posted in another thread: http://huayanzang.blogspot.in/2012/12/innumerable-buddhas-and-mystical.html "...The practice of phowa is likewise remarkable. Later period masters developed methods of ejecting the consciousness out of the body either at death or before. It is one of the six yogas of Naropa. It is still actively practised today in Tibetan schools of Buddhism, one modern master being Ayang Rinpoche. Experienced practitioners are able to euthanize themselves through this meditation if they must, although this method is usually used at the time of death as an aid in the transference of consciousness. In an interview for Australia’s Broadcasting Corporation Lama Choedak Rinpoche explained how monks used phowa when the Chinese invaded Tibet: “There were lots of stories about people when some of the monks were arrested and loaded in the truck, ready to take to the prison. They had already done their self phowa which we may call Buddhist version of euthanasia, to take themselves without allowing their captors to having to commit the terrible karma of killing or torturing them. They instead saw no purpose or meaning for them to remain in this hired body and therefore they wanted to leave in grace rather than in disgrace. So that kind of a sign and ability exists in the good practitioners.” 5 Powers describes the basic method: “...pronouncing the mantra hik sends the consciousness out, and the mantra ka causes it to return. The process is repeated three times, and one sign of success is the appearance of a small hole (or sometimes a pustule) at the fontanel, out of which a small amount of blood or lymph flows.” 6

That was cool, but why is this in the Buddhist sub-forum?

It's possessive, so it should actually be read as "for simplicity's sake".

Nan Hauijin (nor the Buddhist canon) does not say that dhyana in itself leads to realization; he equally emphasizes prajna and the development of insight in his books. Ven. Phra Acharn Mun's hagiography (http://www.thaibuddhism.net/Achan_Man.pdf) mentions a bhikkhu who thought of making the vow to one day become a paccekabuddha by awakening in a time when there is no buddhadharma. So, this requires accumulating lifetimes of merit to achieve (more than what it takes for arahantship). Pratyekabuddha's are basically crypto-realists (buddhist definition). There are differences between how Theravada and certain Mahayana traditions categorize a pratyekabuddha's realization, but generally they are described as appearing in a time when the buddhadharma hasn't been reestablished in the world by a samyaksambuddha. They are said to awaken by contemplating the 12 links of dependent origination. For simplicities sake, I would say that they gain insight into the 3 characteristics (i.e. emptiness of persons); though this would differ apparently according to some Tibetans when they say they also realize half of the emptiness of phenomena. I think this is due to namarupa (i.e. mind & body) in the 12 links. In Mahayana, the pratyekabuddhayana is lower than the bodhisattvayana, but categorized as higher than the sravakayana. Links for further reading: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha126.htm http://www.bps.lk/olib/wh/wh305.pdf http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Paccekabuddha http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/pa/pacceka_buddha.htm Rigpa wiki: http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Pratyekabuddha http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Pratyekabuddha_yana http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Bodhisattva_yana

The book(s) that he's referencing are a translation of transcripts from a lecture on the Yogacarabhumi-shastra (think of it in terms of the path and stages as laid out in the Abhisamayalankara). Nan Huaijin wasn't talking about gradually going through the path and stages in terms of realization (since he talks a lot about Ch'an, with a brief mention of Mahamudra). In terms of reaching anuttara-samyaksambodhi: he mentions gradually cultivating the paths and stages as laid out in the tripitaka. Not according to the standard of 3 asamkhyea kalpas, but in a single lifetime. When Chiforce mentions "following the Hinayana path in order to reach the Mahayana path," he is referring to the elimination of the 88 deluded viewpoints and 81 cognitive delusions to reach arahantship [http://books.google.com/books?id=cFEfrVMdxiEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false]. His two books are interesting, since it goes into details of the purification of the elements and the development of the bases of power (e.g. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn51/sn51.020.than.html) or when he mentions the majority of practitioners (Buddhist and non-Buddhist) mostly reaching the outer heavens of each jhana states and how reaching the inner heavens is a rarer accomplishment.

Depends on how you define "devotion". In Vajrayana, both the East Asian and Tibetan variety, there are sadhanas for deities which are associated with "Hinduism" (e.g. Mahakala). There are examples such as from the Lotus Sutra of deities rakshasas who pledged to uphold the teachings and protect Buddhist practitioners from wild animals, mischievous/negative spirits, etc. when meditating in the wilderness/charnal grounds; by providing a mantra/dharani for them to recite. Yeah, that makes sense.

Even in the Pali canon/Agamas you'll find devotional aspects to "Hindu" deities, many of whom serve as protectors of the Buddhist doctrine (e.g. Brahma and Indra). An article from a person with an M.A. in Buddhist studies delves into this: http://huayanzang.blogspot.com/2012/10/buddhism-is-pagan.html. Could you elaborate on the reason for this?

Well, the continuation of a specific period in the development of Indian Buddhism.

Do you have any evidence to support this statement? Have you been involved in or know anyone who has been involved with translation projects at universities? Or with a board of directors/committee who oversee translation projects with certain publications?

The conditions which lead to insight can be cultivated in the meditative and post-meditative periods.

Excerpts from an article that I think gives some practical advice on applying vipassana which could apply to anyone. I think Buddha's instructions to his son Rahula is an especially good life skill for a parent to teach their children in order to instill good habits for later in life (good since it teaches introspection and for learning how to assess their own actions; which is something I should learn myself). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/integrityofemptiness.html Observing Everyday Actions The Buddha told Rahula — who was seven at the time — to use his thoughts, words, and deeds as a mirror. In other words, just as you would use a mirror to check for any dirt on your face, Rahula was to use his actions as a means of learning where there was still anything impure in his mind. Before he acted, he should try to anticipate the results of the action. If he saw that they'd be harmful to himself or to others, he shouldn't follow through with the action. If he foresaw no harm, he could go ahead and act. If, in the course of doing the action, he saw it causing unexpected harm, he should stop the action. If he didn't see any harm, he could continue with it.If, after he was done, he saw any long-term harm resulting from the action, he should consult with another person on the path to get some perspective on what he had done — and on how not to do it again — and then resolve not to repeat that mistake. In other words, he should not feel embarrassed or ashamed to reveal his mistakes to people he respected, for if he started hiding his mistakes from them, he would soon start hiding them from himself. If, on the other hand, he saw no harm resulting from the action, he should rejoice in his progress in the practice and continue with his training. The right name for this reflection is not "self-purification." It's "action-purification." You deflect judgments of good and bad away from your sense of self, where they can tie you down with conceit and guilt. Instead, you focus directly on the actions themselves, where the judgments can allow you to learn from your mistakes and to find a healthy joy in what you did right. When you keep reflecting in this way, it serves many purposes. First and foremost, it forces you to be honest about your intentions and about the effects of your actions. Honesty here is a simple principle: you don't add any after-the-fact rationalizations to cover up what you actually did, nor do you try to subtract from the actual facts through denial. Because you're applying this honesty to areas where the normal reaction is to be embarrassed about or afraid of the truth, it's more than a simple registering of the facts. It also requires moral integrity. This is why the Buddha stressed morality as a precondition for wisdom, and declared the highest moral principle to be the precept against lying. If you don't make a habit of admitting uncomfortable truths, the truth as a whole will elude you. The second purpose of this reflection is to emphasize the power of your actions. You see that your actions do make the difference between pleasure and pain. Third, you gain practice in learning from your mistakes without shame or remorse. Fourth, you realize that the more honest you are in evaluating your actions, the more power you have to change your ways in a positive direction. And finally, you develop good will and compassion, in that you resolve to act only on intentions that mean no harm to anyone, and you continually focus on developing the skill of harmlessness as your top priority. All of these lessons are necessary to develop the kind of wisdom measured by the Buddha's test for wisdom; and, as it turns out, they're directly related to the first meaning of emptiness, as an approach to meditation. In fact, this sort of emptiness simply takes the instructions Rahula received for observing everyday actions and extends them to the act of perception within the mind. Emptiness as an Approach to MeditationEmptiness as an approach to meditation is the most basic of the three kinds of emptiness. In the context of this approach, emptiness means "empty of disturbance" — or, to put it in other terms, empty of stress. You bring the mind to concentration and then examine your state of concentration in order to detect the presence or absence of subtle disturbance or stress still inherent within that state. When you find a disturbance, you follow it back to the perception — the mental label or act of recognition — on which the concentration is based. Then, you drop that perception in favor of a more refined one, one leading to a state of concentration with less inherent disturbance. In the discourse explaining this meaning of emptiness (MN 121), the Buddha introduces his explanation with a simile. He and Ananda are dwelling in an abandoned palace that is now a quiet monastery. The Buddha tells Ananda to notice and appreciate how the monastery is empty of the disturbances it contained when it was still used as a palace — the disturbances caused by gold and silver, elephants and horses, assemblies of women and men. The only disturbance remaining is that caused by the presence of the monks meditating in unity. Taking this observation as a simile, the Buddha launches into his description of emptiness as an approach to meditation. (The simile is reinforced by the fact that the Pali word for "monastery" or "dwelling" — vihara — also means "attitude" or "approach.") He describes a monk meditating in the wilderness who is simply noting to himself that he is now in the wilderness. The monk allows his mind to concentrate on and enjoy the perception, "wilderness." He then steps back mentally to observe and appreciate that this mode of perception is empty of the disturbances that come with perceptions of the village life he has left behind. The only remaining disturbances are those associated with the perception, "wilderness" — for example, any emotional reactions to the dangers that wilderness might entail. As the Buddha says, the monk sees accurately which disturbances are not present in that mode of perception; as for those remaining, he sees accurately, "There is this." In other words, he adds nothing to what is there and takes nothing away. This is how he enters into a meditative emptiness that is pure and undistorted. Then, noting the disturbances inherent in the act of focusing on "wilderness," the monk drops that perception and replaces it with a more refined perception, one with less potential for arousing disturbance. He chooses the earth element, banishing from his mind any details of the hills and ravines of the earth, simply taking note of its earthness. He repeats the process he applied to the perception of wilderness — settling into the perception of "earth," fully indulging in it, and then stepping back to notice how the disturbances associated with "wilderness" are now gone, while the only remaining disturbances are those associated with the singleness of mind based on the perception of "earth." He then repeats the same process with ever more refined perceptions, settling into the formless jhanas, or meditative absorptions: infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness, neither perception nor non-perception, and the objectless concentration of awareness. Finally, seeing that even this objectless concentration of awareness is fabricated and willed, he drops his desire to continue mentally fabricating anything at all. In this way he is released from the mental fermentations — sensual desire, becoming, views, ignorance — that would "bubble up" into further becoming. He observes that this release still has the disturbances that come with the functioning of the six sense spheres, but that it's empty of all fermentation, all potential for further suffering and stress. This, concludes the Buddha, is the entry into a pure and undistorted emptiness that is superior and unsurpassed. It's the emptiness in which he himself dwells and that, throughout time, has never been nor ever will be excelled. Throughout this description, emptiness means one thing: empty of disturbance or stress. The meditator is taught to appreciate the lack of disturbance as a positive accomplishment, and to see any remaining disturbance created by the mind, however subtle, as a problem to be solved. When you understand disturbance as a subtle form of harm, you see the connections between this description of emptiness and the Buddha's instructions to Rahula. Instead of regarding his meditative states as a measure of self-identity or self-worth — in having developed a self that's purer, more expansive, more at one with the ground of being — the monk views them simply in terms of actions and their consequences. And the same principles apply here, on the meditative level, as apply in the Buddha's comments to Rahula on action in general. Here, the action is the perception that underlies your state of meditative concentration. You settle into the state by repeating the action of perception continually until you are thoroughly familiar with it. Just as Rahula discovered the consequences of his actions by observing the obvious harm done to himself or to others, here you discover the consequences of concentrating on the perception by seeing how much disturbance arises from the mental action. As you sense disturbance, you can change your mental action, moving your concentration to a more refined perception, until ultimately you can stop the fabrication of mental states altogether. At the core of this meditation practice are two important principles derived from the instructions to Rahula. The first is honesty: the ability to be free of embellishment or denial, adding no interpretation to the disturbance actually present, while at the same time not trying to deny that it's there. An integral part of this honesty is the ability to see things simply as action and result, without reading into them the conceit "I am." The second principle is compassion — the desire to end suffering — in that you keep trying to abandon the causes of stress and disturbance wherever you find them. The effects of this compassion extend not only to yourself, but to others as well. When you don't weigh yourself down with stress, you're less likely to be a burden to others; you're also in a better position to help shoulder their burdens when need be. In this way, the principles of integrity and compassion underlie even the most subtle expressions of the wisdom leading to release. This process of developing emptiness of disturbance is not necessarily smooth and straightforward. It keeps requiring the strength of will needed to give up any attachment. This is because an essential step in getting to know the meditative perception as an action is learning to settle into it, to indulge in it — in other words, to enjoy it thoroughly, even to the point of attachment. This is one of the roles of tranquility in meditation. If you don't learn to enjoy the meditation enough to keep at it consistently, you won't grow familiar with it. If you aren't familiar with it, insight into its consequences won't arise. However, unless you've already had practice using the Rahula instructions to overcome grosser attachments, then even if you gain insight into the disturbances caused by your attachment to concentration, your insight will lack integrity. Because you haven't had any practice with more blatant attachments, you won't be able to pry loose your subtle attachments in a reliable way. You first need to develop the moral habit of looking at your actions and their consequences, believing firmly — through experience — in the worth of refraining from harm, however subtle. Only then will you have the skill needed to develop emptiness as an approach to meditation in a pure and undistorted way that will carry you all the way to its intended goal. The Wisdom of Emptiness Thus the last two types of emptiness ultimately lead back to the first — emptiness as an approach to meditation — which means that all three types of emptiness ultimately lead to the same destination. Whether they interpret emptiness as meaning empty of disturbance (suffering/stress) or empty of self, whether they encourage fostering insight through tranquility or tranquility through insight, they all culminate in a practice that completes the tasks appropriate to the four noble truths: comprehending stress, abandoning its cause, realizing its cessation, and developing the path to that cessation. Completing these tasks leads to release. What's distinctive about this process is the way it grows out of the principles of action-purification that the Buddha taught to Rahula, applying these principles to every step of the practice from the most elementary to the most refined. As the Buddha told Rahula, these principles are the only possible means by which purity can be attained. Although most explanations of this statement define purity as purity of virtue, the Buddha's discussion of emptiness as an approach to meditation shows that purity here means purity of mind and purity of wisdom as well. Every aspect of the training is purified by viewing it in terms of actions and consequences, which helps to develop the integrity that's willing to admit to unskillful actions, and the mature goodwill that keeps aiming at consequences entailing ever less harm, disturbance, and stress....In building the path to this emptiness on the same principles that underlie the more elementary levels of action-purification, the Buddha managed to avoid creating artificial dichotomies between conventional and ultimate truths in the practice. For this reason, his approach to ultimate wisdom helps validate the more elementary levels as well. When you realize that an undistorted understanding of emptiness depends on the skills you develop in adopting a responsible, honest, and kind attitude toward all your actions, you're more likely to bring this attitude to everything you do — gross or subtle. You give more importance to all your actions and their consequences, you give more importance to your sense of integrity, for you realize that these things are directly related to the skills leading to total release. You can't develop a throwaway attitude to your actions and their consequences, for if you do you're throwing away your chances for a true and unconditional happiness. The skills you need to talk yourself into meditating on a cold, dark morning, or into resisting a drink on a lazy afternoon, are the same ones that will eventually guarantee an undistorted realization of the highest peace...

That's even more ambiguous than the how it's used by Freud and Jung. It's also packaged with conscious and unconscious (aka. 'subconscious') divisions in experience among other things that don't relate to Indian concepts. "Ego", is overly simplistic and an inadequate concept in comparison to Indian philosophical thought. The twelve links of dependent origination is a conceptual model which accurately describes an individual experience of samsara starting from the condition of ignorance. Nagarjuna simplified this to a revolving cycle of samskaras, karma, dukkha: http://www.lotsawahouse.org/indian-masters/nagarjuna/heart-dependent-origination: The Heart of Dependent Originationby Arya Nagarjuna In the language of India: pratityasamutpada hridaya karika In the language of Tibet: རྟེན་ཅིང་འབྲེལ་པར་འབྱུང་བའི་སྙིང་པོའི་ཙིག་ལེའུར་བྱས་པ།, (ten ching drelpar jungwé nyingpö tsik le'ur jepa) Homage to Mañjushri, the Youthful! These different links, twelve in number, Which Buddha taught as dependent origination, Can be summarized in three categories: Mental afflictions, karma and suffering. The first, eighth and ninth are afflictions, The second and tenth are karma, The remaining seven are suffering. Thus the twelve links are grouped in three. From the three the two originate, And from the two the seven come, From seven the three come once again— Thus the wheel of existence turns and turns. All beings consist of causes and effects, In which there is no ‘sentient being’ at all. From phenomena which are exclusively empty, There arise only empty phenomena. All things are devoid of any ‘I’ or ‘mine’. Like a recitation, a candle, a mirror, a seal, A magnifying glass, a seed, sourness, or a sound, So also with the continuation of the aggregates— The wise should know they are not transferred. Then, as for extremely subtle entities, Those who regard them with nihilism, Lacking precise and thorough knowledge, Will not see the actuality of conditioned arising. In this, there is not a thing to be removed, Nor the slightest thing to be added. It is looking perfectly into reality itself, And when reality is seen, complete liberation. This concludes the verses on ‘The Heart of Dependent Origination’ composed by the teacher Arya Nagarjuna. | Translated by Adam Pearcey, Rigpa Translations, 2008.

The problem is you're trying to understand this through deluded perspectives.This can't be thoroughly recognized through the sphere of logic alone, but there is an opportunity for direct understanding by continually familiarizing yourself with the 3 characteristics in all experiences (while realization is ultimately alogical, I'm not saying that this can't be pointed out to others or that conceptual understanding doesn't lead to insight and is unimportant). It not about negating (or affirming) any of the processes of the 5 aggregates. The Buddha in various places in the Pali canon, already made it quite clear on how one skillfully attends oneself, in order to foster the conditions for the 8-fold noble path which starts with right view and ends with right contemplation/meditation. Throughout the Pali canon, it's seen that he taught in such a way as to rid practitioners of wrong view in order to directly intuit the 4 noble truths and 8-fold noble path. It deals with a lot of the common views that you can still come across even in modern times. I posted some suttas which are relevant to this discussion in this thread http://thetaobums.com/topic/28497-the-skeptical-buddhistcritical-thinking-buddhism/page-2#entry437005. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.086.than.html: "Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?" "No, lord." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.109.than.html: "...the monk... asked him a further question: "Is clinging the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates, or is clinging separate from the five clinging-aggregates?" "Monk, clinging is neither the same thing as the five clinging-aggregates, nor is it separate from the five clinging-aggregates. Just that whatever passion & delight is there, that's the clinging there." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.012.nypo.html: "Who, O Lord, clings?" "The question is not correct," said the Exalted One, "I do not say that 'he clings.' Had I said so, then the question 'Who clings?' would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be 'What is the condition of clinging?' And to that the correct reply is: 'Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the condition of the process of becoming.' Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering.[7] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html: "Does Master Gotama have any position at all?" "A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origin, such its disappearance; such is perception... such are mental fabrications... such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending, fading out, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsession with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.than.html: "‘The seen will be merely the seen, the heard will be merely the heard, the sensed will be merely the sensed, the known will be merely the known.’ This is how you should train, Bāhiya. When, Bāhiya, for you the seen will be merely the seen, the heard will be merely the heard, the sensed will be merely the sensed, the known will be merely the known, then Bāhiya, you will not be that. When, Bāhiya, you are not that, then Bāhiya, you will not be there. When, Bāhiya, you are not there, then Bāhiya, you will be neither here nor beyond nor between-the-two. Just this is the end of unsatisfactoriness." http://measurelessmind.ca/anattasanna.html Kalakarama Sutta: "Thus, monks, the Tathāgata does not conceive an [object] seen when seeing what is to be seen. He does not conceive an unseen. He does not conceive a to-be-seen. He does not conceive a seer. He does not conceive an [object] heard when hearing what is to be heard. He does not conceive an unheard. He does not conceive a to-be-heard. He does not conceive a hearer. He does not conceive an [object] sensed when sensing what is to be sensed. He does not conceive an unsensed. He does not conceive a to-be-sensed. He does not conceive a senser. He does not conceive an [object] known when knowing what is to be known. He does not conceive an unknown. He does not conceive a to-be-known. He does not conceive a knower."

You should also look more into Samkyha's influence over all major Indian philosophies (both the non-theistic and theistic variety), even though it's a dualistic school.

Presence or Being = Brahman Definitely not anywhere close to what Buddhism describes, but is closer to what you would come across in Neo-Advaita.

Ummmmm, no.

Do you mean "ego" in Freudian terms? This is a Western concept with no counterpart in Indian philosophy.