Jeff

Bindi, You know that is not the way that I described it in the context at the time. As, I have repeatedly stated, there is a difference between conscious and subconscious perception. Also, are you now saying that you did not "notice me" or any energy flow from the contact? Best, Jeff

If you are going to say that I continually state something, you could at least post something that I have said (not two other people ). What do you mean by what is perceived? Trying to define some "thing" or "substance"?

Totally agree with you. But, "realization" is an ongoing process rather than an "end". The energy stuff never stops, unless one thinks they are "done".

I dont understand what you are trying to say here. I have never said that no one has actually perceived it. I have only said that there are relative levels of perception. The concept is similar to the taoist understanding of increasing refinement of energy. The greater the persons mental clarity, the more direct the perception. A simple example from the bible was that Moses "saw a burning bush", Jesus was "one with God". As we have discussed many times, I often describe it as the difference between "seeing" and "being".

I have never claimed that it can't be seen or felt. I have stated many times that if the person does not have the ability to directly percieve at the "light level", they can often get a component/aspect of it as a mind level transmission. Any one who is open to at least the heart chakra will probably feel something, and anyone who is open to the 6th/3rd eye will probably see something. Many members have even posted on that point in the "with any realization" thread. You, at your level, would probably feel some aspect of it at a conscious level, it is just that most of the transmission would be subconscious. Possibly parts of it coming into conscious mind during "vivid dreams".

TI, As many of the members here know, I can make my presence known with the checking (for those with the capacity). Bindi even posts about it in other threads. Best, Jeff

Sooner or later energy work/refinement is critical for all paths of truth/realization/knowing. And, yes that is my "dogma".

As 3bob has stated, I don't see why there is all the obsession with seeing/knowing things about people like chakras. But, if it is import to you Bindi, I can do it. What do you want to know about your chakra development (or inner channels)?

I am talking about something beyond simple intellectual understanding. Perhaps you would prefer the definition of a sage from the TTC... CHAPTER 7 Heaven and Earth are still. Why are Heaven and Earth still? Because they are detached. The Sage is detached, so he is like Heaven and Earth; thus he is at one with all. Being at one, he performs selfless actions and so he is fulfilled. CHAPTER 22 Yield and overcome. Bend but follow the flow. Empty yourself of everything, then you can full. Have little but gain a lot. Have much and be confused. Therefore the sage embraces the one. He sets an example to the world. By not putting on a display, he shines forth. Having no preferences he is open to all. By never boasting or bragging he can never falter. By knowing this and refusing that, He knows of the ways of man. Thus he can avoid a quarrel. The ancient masters were always empty. This emptiness was always whole. Yield and overcome and be forever full, and so all things will come to you.

I think we just have very different understandings of the terms oneness and nonduality. The mind is clear and there are no such judgmental arisings of like or don't like, hate or don't hate. Such is the definition of individual sense of self/ego. A simple example of my meaning from the Dhammapada... He moves with love among the unloving, With peace and detachment Among the hungry and querulous. Like a mustard seed from the point of a needle Hatred has fallen from him, And lust, hypocrisy and pride. He offends no one. Yet he speaks the truth. His words are clear But never harsh. Whatever is not his He refuses, Good or bad, great or small. He wants nothing from this world And nothing from the next. He is free. Desiring nothing, doubting nothing, Beyond judgement and sorrow And the pleasures of the senses, He had moved beyond time. He is pure and free. How clear he is. He is the moon. He is serene. He shines.

If you "don't like someone", that is definitely not oneness/non-duality. That is not just separate sense of self, but also dualistic judgement.

Kind of like nesting dolls...

Excellent! Worth repeating. Thank you

With seeing past the limited body mind and direct integration (as/in/being) consciousness energy is effectively unlimited. The belief or sense of it being "your" energy or that it needs to be stored is itself a limiting belief that creates boundaries.

There are many, but true communion is a good example. If you are interested, I have discussed some examples in many of the Christian mysticism type threads on the forum. Or maybe more broadly search on the word Jesus where I am the author to find some of the posts.

Sorry, I was not attempting to insert myself in your discussion with Jonesboy. Was just responding directly to you and your statement. I have not been really following all of this thread as you and I have already discussed the blue pearl concept in detail in another thread.

Then I would suggest that you debate that with him, as it is not my position. Jesus taught a very clear path with many significant lineage refinements based on his "higher/clearer" realization.

Jesus was very clear in his statements. He moved well beyond any previous understanding and tradition. His "one with the Father" and his description of the Holy Father was vastly different than as described in the Torah. But, God did not change, only the realization and understanding of one who had the clarity to know. The gospels and the old testement are two completely different books.

The teachings of Jesus are very much about a new "covenant"(understanding/realization). He often uses the new wine and wineskin example. A more specific reference to the point below... 2 Corinthians - 3:12-18 12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: 13 And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: 14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. 15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. 16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. 17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

"Moves on from there"... Does that not imply that there is somewhere to go? Maybe some words of Jesus on the point... Luke 17: 20-21 20 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 21 nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.”

Yes, as the Heart Sutra says... Emptiness = Form and Form = Emptiness. If one only pays attention to one side of the side of the equation, they will not find the "narrow gate".

Very interesting. Thanks. Would you also say that would relate to the percieved difference between an arhat and a Buddha?

Hi Anderson, Thanks for the post. Could you state who or where it is found? Also, I see that the text states that it is effectively a "better and different" path, but do you really get that it rejects Mahayana (says it is wrong)? Are you stating that Dzogchen "emptiness" is somehow different that Mahayana "emptiness"? And thus, even buddhahood between the two is different? Regards, Jeff

Are you serious? Could you site some reference to that position?

Thank you for responding to me. I am sorry to hear that you feel that way. I had hoped we could have had a healthy discussion about the practices, while comparing and contrasting techniques. Best wishes, Jeff