Jetsun

It sounds like you have a strong intuition that you should do something, instead of looking outward at what you should do instead turn around and see where that call of intuition is coming from. That yearning is coming from somewhere, instead of following it outwards looking to fulfil its call instead track it back to its source.

Many of the Buddhist sutras were meant for the individual receiving them and not for general consumption. A lot of the teachings are meant for monks in seclusion. Many of the teachings are designed in the context of you having a dedicated personal relationship with a guru. So it isn't surprising that there is a lot of misunderstanding and confusion, the balance is very subtle and many fall over one side into a nihilistic slant for a time.

------- Mod Warning-------- I know this is an old thread from 2010 but please don't post any more links to that book or any other copyright material Thanks --------------------------------

Not really, whatever works best for the individual is superior for the individual, but I think its harder for people to use Advaita to help solidify a separate sense of self, sure some people probably use it for that but its harder I think to pin your identity as an Advaitan because there are fewer religious and sectarian trappings to get entangled in to delay your unfolding and to pin an individual sense of self upon. But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

I have no agenda to divorce anything from anything but the teachings can't be owned by any religion because by their nature they are meant to transcend all dividing lines and concepts. If the teachings work they are meant to wake you up out of Hinduism or Buddhism not solidify your identity into such a concept. Also what we are talking about is available to anyone and everyone no matter where you are born or what religion you are, we are talking about the truth of identity and reality for everyone on the planet not some thing which can be owned by a select group of people. I am not very interested in the scholarly approach to this at the moment apart from in passing interest so I doubt I will be reading much, which is why I like the Advaita approach as it isn't about mind stuff it is more about direct embodied experience

I don't think it is that tainted, but just from observation it is pretty obvious that a lot of people get stuck in sectarianism and religious trappings rather than what it is pointing at. All that stuff even spreads to westerners on forums who have no business whatsoever getting involved in Tibetan politics. That is pretty much what Malcolm says in that post that he got trapped in all that stuff which is a hindrance to true compassion. Whereas Advaita doesn't have any of that stuff, which is all I mean by it being purer, not that it is better or superior because ultimately I believe they are pointing at the same thing but there are fewer things that you can get stuck on to distract you or fixate on.

Is that really what you think the point of his post is? Whether it is a rip off or not it doesn't matter, what matters is whether it helps people to see the truth about reality. If there really isn't a big difference between Advaita and Madhyamaka then Advaita may be a purer transmission because it isn't mixed up with all the sectarian bs and religious stuff.

nvm

The method of Byron Katie turns the energy of a thought in on itself, its remarkably effective I find. It's not that you actually get rid of the thoughts themselves its that when they are questioned in that particular way it is shown that the exact opposite thought has an equal validity, which deconstructs the belief in the thought as being represetitive of reality so the dynamic colapses and the thought leaves you, you don't have to get rid if it.

The situation is that we have a thread which is receiving multiple reports every day from a number of different members about harassment of the op. We had already warned and suspended a number of posters for harassment and you come in with another criticism about a trifling issue which was perceived as a continuation of the group harassment, and somebody reported your post. That is the context of moderator action in that thread.

He doesn't ever attack any members directly so it is difficult to say he breaks any rules. It is clear though from Skydogs recent thread that a number of members are getting tired of him constantly repeating a select few mantras over and over.

I read the whole comment and took it in the context of the whole thread which has had numerous reports of repeated harassment of the op. There is no reason why the moderators have to put up with attacks from your original post or sarcasm from your edited post, so you get a suspension.

~~~~~~~~~~~~ moderator message ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please refrain from such general criticism or you will be suspended

Then prove it, at the moment it just looks like personal attacks and harassment

I don't think that is true, an illiterate who is completely devoted and willing to surrender to their Lama will progress faster than an intellectual obsessed with wordplay

Even if that's true all that might mean is a high level of intellectual learning, it doesn't mean he has any sort of depth of personal realisation. I have never met the guy he might be the next Buddha, but there are many intelligent scholars who can write well but it doesn't mean that the Dharma has penetrated any further than a tiny area of the frontal cortex.

Maybe he is a nihilist

To say nothing exists is nihilism "'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle..." - Nagarjuna

You can't prove an infinite regression of cause and effect, therefore you cant disprove a creator. Saying everything is illusory just means the way we are perceiving things is different from the way they actually are, which doesn't disprove a creator it just means we are mistaken in our perception of the nature of the universe.

I wonder what's harder having an open third eye or an open heart in this society. Without stabilisation in emptiness then either is probably going to be overwhelming, but if you are somewhat awakened you can probably handle it because everything will just flow through and nothing will stick, but if you are still stuck in a limited sense of individual I then your mind will probably weave all sorts of stories and dreams out of your open experiences which will probably include all sorts of nightmares.

If you two want your own thread to debate these issues we can sort that out, otherwise it would be helpful if you both stay on topic otherwise it is inevitably going to quickly turn into pointless trading of insults

Please stay on topic or this will have to go in the pit

That is basically how Gurdjieff described the human condition, all these different "I's" within us competing for attention. Trying to get rid of one or some of them is just another way to strengthen them as your focus on it just feeds it attention and energy, so integration is the only way to go, if any get destroyed it wont be you doing the destruction.

You can't, there are thousands of maps trying to identify it all saying different things. Nobody has ever found an ego.

How they each define God I don't know and it is an assumption of mine why they do, I just found it interesting that these highly accomplished teachers still believe in God, I think John Chang and Chunyi Lin even go to Church while Waysun Liao says we have a spark of God within us which can be nurtured. People can interpret this how they like.