林愛偉

Of course I know what the "deal" is. I'm part of his FB page which is dedicated to this research. So what if other companies cough up the money and not Stig? He has other organizations willing to front the cash if their scientific testing is passed. He doesn't get a cut of the winnings...but I would indeed hand over some to him just out of good faith. hahaha

Yes Yes! I heard of this back in the '80's...not this test, but that the U.S. gov uses remote viewing. HAHA So it may be that as long as the gov finds it useful, they will discredit it among the masses so as to make sure no one else realizes how to do it..then start a rebellion. ooooooppppssss (Disclaimer: I'm not responsible for those who try to use their remote viewing abilities to start rebellions against the u.s. gov. It is their own choice and responsibility).

Einstein probably warned them not to assume too much, "Don't think you will understand what I do. I just make this crap up as I go." hahahaha

It would be funny if someone accepted the challenge, and attained the 1.5 mil and proved all wrong about the legitimacy of this offer. I would take the challenge, but I am truly in the know that what ever I have, I can not produce it on spot, at any time I wish unless I am in danger or facing unreasonable people leading to being in a life-threatening situation. I would fail the test! hahahahaha Its kind of like a protective response, not something in leisure. Requires one to have faith in what they do and practice, practice, practice Also what I teach is dependent on the person, thus its not certain they will attain anything I may teach which leads to something "unusual", and or wisdom wise. So, I don't post anything I can "do", don't advertise anything outside of what is done normally, and let my students know that whatever they get from me, and whatever they feel from me is based on their own capacity to understand: That its not certain they will be able to do what I "can", but with practice they may get close, or eventually "attain" something. And its all dependent on themselves. If they are content with that, then its good, if not, I would direct them to the people who claim great abilities from their practice. Sorry Stigweard, I wish I was more capable to help out

I'm grateful for washing machines, radiators (electrical ones), and water heaters! Also electric sewing machines, computers and wireless internet ..thingies. Planes are good too, because I don't want to be eaten by sharks taking a boat ride to China. It would be fun to ride in a carriage pulled by actual horses, but would probably stink. Peace, Lin

I totally support Stigweard's proposal. If its believed to be a fraud, why not research the organizations involved who are offering the money, along with the research centers organizing the experiments? If they are legitimate organizations, then "passing" the experiments and not receiving the money would be a very bad reflection upon them, along with publicizing their actions. With the experiments, why not take someone with you? Preferably another scientific researcher who would remain unbiased with the experiment, and observe all the testing, taking notes and copies of the research files, along with a lawyer? This way, someone unrelated to the experiment may take an on hand observation and record all findings. Thus, any tampering with any type of results would be almost impossible. What if its not fraudulent? Then, by not taking the opportunity, one misses out on 1.5 mil, and fails to offer a bright light in the darkness of mystified claims and egotistical approaches in Taiji Quan. I believe in abilities which arise when the time is needed due to one's cultivation. Thus reproducing certain effects may not be possible. Sometimes an ability just comes suddenly and disappears just as fast. Its in a time of need basis. Some people have the ability to reproduce the effects at any time. Whether they can be done any time or not doesn't make the ability non-existent. YET those who can reproduce it, and show it in a controlled scientific experiment would offer much to those in the world of Taiji Quan. If one can do it, why not go for the gold? Unless they choose to lay low, which in that case do not look for students, or at least do not accept many students. In the old days, there were many who had skill and only accepted a few students in a lifetime. Those teachers weren't very famous and stayed out of the public eye.

I wish there was more I can do, but being in China, well, I can only show moral support. Peace and Blessings! Amitabha!

Wonderful project and wonderful intentions. You are so very right in these words that until a religion learns to speak the language of the land, it will remain marginalized and quaint. Peace and Blessings, Lin P.S.: If I lived in your area, I would definitely be honored to work with you on this. Perhaps I could sweep the floors of the Pure Land Center, and or serve the tea...

A Martial Artist’s Greatest Mis-Conception By: Lin Ai Wei In the last hundred years we have seen much from international trade and cooperation. This kind of “bridging cultures” has brought much traditional culture to the fore-front of our “modern-era”. One such culture is that of martial arts. When martial arts are introduced to a society, the first aspect that is seen as “special” is the fighting applications. The martial aspects are what catches people’s eyes at first glance, and becomes rooted in their minds as the most important aspect. This root-thought further breeds thoughts of superiority; empowering ego, separation; empowering ideas of various social levels, and thus manifests a culture of mis-conceived notions which point back to egotistical lifestyles and behaviors. One such idea is the title of “Shifu, Sifu”,师傅、师父. What does this title mean, and what is the reason for its use? The title “Shifu”, in the Chinese National Language, or Sifu, in Cantonese, has two very distinct meanings. Let’s investigate what it is, and then we can further realize the mis-conception that has been rooted deep in western culture. 1). Shifu (Sifu) 师傅: Refers to one who is skillful at what they do. For example; a computer technician, chef, driver, dog walker, doctor of medicine, window/dish washer, etc. 2). Shifu (Sifu) 师父: Wrongfully translated to mean “Master”. Refers to one who teaches what they are skilled at, and accepts an apprentice, or many. Both terms in Chinese carry the same tonation. In regards to the second translation of Shifu, there is a saying in Chinese culture, not just in regards to martial arts, but to anything one teaches, “一日为师，终生为父”: One day a teacher, a lifetime a father. Obviously, the title of Shifu has nothing to do with the word master. If we were to say master in terms of how it is used today by martial artists, we would be better off using the term 主人, ( Zhu Ren) which would best be described as an overseer of one’s life, for example, someone who takes you in and takes care of you, if you are an orphan. An example of its use would be: Master, I bought the groceries. Using the term Shifu to mean one who is in mastery of their skills would insinuate that the person called Shifu would be undefeated in a fight. Unfortunately, there is no such thing. When looking at the term Shifu being used to refer to Buddhist monks, then we must understand the culture behind its use. When calling a Buddhist monk, Shifu, we are stating that they are our teachers of the Buddha-Teachings for this lifetime, a teacher and father. The monk would be in a high skill of control over their mind, and in a state of great wisdom to assist those he has fate with in studying the Buddha’s teachings. In this case, the monk would be seen as doing something that is very hard to conceive of to non monks. That is, having put down sexual desires, greed, anger and ignorance. In comparison to martial artists, not many can do that at all. Referring to the first description of Shifu, meaning one skilled at what they do, we see that it is a respectful title offered by people as a way of having proper manners, being nice to the person. Calling one a Shifu at what they do acknowledges that person’s hard work and shows appreciation for them in giving us their service. This is a Chinese cultural behavior, and not exclusive to just martial art culture. Never has there been a martial artist who refers to another martial artist as Shifu (师父). If he did, then he is referring to the other as a father and teacher, his own. Yet, one martial artist calling another one Shifu (师傅), is a very common, respectful mannerism. Due to the misuse of the term Shifu, many have held their martial arts teachers in a high regard, sometimes taking all they say as the golden rule, with no room for error. Some even have taken to the idea that because their teacher is very skilled at fighting, and teaching, that the teacher is some how spiritually enlightened. Last but not least, many see martial art teachers as one sees movie stars, and even in some cases a god. As it is, none of these views lead to wholesome lifestyles…unless it is true that the martial art teacher has become spiritually enlightened; and if so, it most definitely wouldn’t be from learning how to beat someone up, but from principles and proper education in the way towards enlightenment. That being the case, the teacher most likely wouldn’t be teaching how to fight unless the student displayed mannerisms of humility and selflessness. The misuse of this term has resulted in such a deeply rooted mis-conception, and plagues the “modern” culture of the western martial arts world with ego, superiority and separation. In taking on the title, realize that it is just a title, a word in the Chinese language, and any persona attached to the title is simply just the mannerisms of those who have been called such a thing. When being in the expression of the above first example of Shifu, the mannerisms of such a person vary, and there are billions of people with billions of different character traits to them. The term Shifu does not carry any character traits behind it, nor does it hold any standard of attainment. It is simply a term in the Chinese language. The same goes for the above second example of the term. The only difference between the two is the manner of responsibility one undertakes. Taking a specific responsibility doesn’t make you any better than the next person. It only states that you have more on to do than most people. The quality of all tasks performed and all methods taught depends on the understanding of the person teaching. Their responsibility is to be sure their apprentice (s) are safe, educated according to the methods taught, and can develop the skill to apply what they are taught. Usually, the teacher’s personal character and views influence the apprentice(s), and the apprentice thus becomes a copy of the teacher, mixed with their own lifestyle and behavior. This is an important issue, and must not be taken lightly. Historically, the persona of a person taking on apprentices is one of a serious, well-mannered, well educated, cultured with positive principles and conduct, virtue and stands for the morality they believe in; al for the good of the people. This kind of example is a very high standard within traditional Chinese martial arts culture as well as traditional culture generally. This kind of education has not been taken serious by a vast majority of western martial artists, and thus leads their students to focus solely on the aggressive mannerisms of martial practice. We have a saying in Chinese for this manner of lifestyle. It is called to “走火入魔”: “To walk along the fiery path and enter demonic states”. Basically it means to focus only on the aggressive and controlling aspects and thus causing the mind to mature to an overpowering, egotistical one. This way eventually leads to violence, health problems and conflicts. Martial Arts culture has within it an education of conduct, virtue, morality, humaneness, academics and service. Teaching requires one to not just be skilled at what they do, but to be educated so as to lead an example for students in principle and righteousness towards being a humane person. If one carries either of the “Shifu” terms, do not think you are someone better than most, and it would be wrong to think that other’s should respect you just because you carry that title. It doesn’t matter how long you have practiced, and it doesn’t matter how much other martial artists like you. You are still a human, and still must do human things. Do not let the idea of a title cloud your mind. To those who are students, it would be wise to observe the character of the person you wish to study under. Learning how to fight is only a small aspect of martial arts culture. One must investigate the culture of what they are studying and observe the potential teacher’s character, for such a person will be a big influence in your life and eventually shape how you behave and see the world. In conclusion, the term Shifu is just a word in the Chinese language. What is more important is the personal character of the one using the title. Choose your teachers wisely, and develop yourself with humaneness, virtue and conduct first. Because it doesn’t matter how well you fight, what does matter is how good of a person you really are.

HAHAHA I had a hat with can holders on both sides! It was great while it lasted. And when I was 9 I had windshield wiper glasses!

mine's grey and another black!

I remember researching about this. The problem was the foreign visitors walked through the society there, saw many who were hungry, and impoverished, yet when they saw the images of the Buddhas deteriorating, they decided to offer money to have it touched up. The government questioned, why would anyone give money to refurnish pieces of stone, when so many people are in need of help financially? So, they destroyed the images. hahaha They have a point. Buddha really didn't care for images of Buddhas, he pointed towards actual practice and less false thinking. Its a good lesson what happened to those statues and shows the confusion of many who just care for images more than actual living beings. I'm sure if anyone wished to help out those people first, and showed an example of selflessness in Buddhism, as a response, the government there would have fixed up the Buddha images on their own, if not, any request to do so would end with desired results. I don't have articles to back it up, but remember the conversations I had with several Buddhist monks who also researched this.

Here I will say this: Pure Land is Chan, is Secret, is Vajra. Chan is Pure Land, is Secret, is Vajra. Secret is Pure Land, is Chan, is Vajra. Vajra is Pure Land, is Chan is Secret. Discriminations abound, and it is the substance of that mind which it is in. Covered by the myriad things, dusting seems fruitless. In time, if it is, will there be a shimmer. No time, when it is, it simply is neither.

Not at all. I speak that the core teaching is all the same. The discriminations between schools defeats the whole point of cultivation. I would never claim one method is more greater than another. for that would not be the Buddha Dharma. It seems that your assumption is the other way around. Many are not understanding what I am truly saying. Added*** My posts are very clear, and straight up, and never have I stated what you say, nor have I meant it. But because I don't give in to petty arguments of this school and that school, my words are twisted. Added*** I will tell you, all the arguing and discussion of methods is of no importance, and only steers people in the direction of further discriminating. My posts point to one thing: To actually PRACTICE the method wholeheartedly, and then decide if it is exactly what people state it is. Added*** So far, in the 10yrs of Pure Land Practice, I have not found any ounce of the nonsense people claim it to be. The same goes for the 25 yrs of both Daoist, Chan, Secret School and Qigong cultivation I have practiced, I have never found it to be any of the commercialized nonsense found out there today. ***Added: I do not discriminate methods, or traditions. I simply do not take apart the Dharma and make a trivial argument as to what is true and what isn't, what did the Buddha say and what he didn't. I have had a very good teacher of the way, and thus taught me that the point is not to see the differences within the Buddha-Dharma, but to realize that the core teachings are the same. If one is going to argue what the Buddha Dharma is, and what "school" does what, then those people should have already spent years and years practicing those methods and have attained all there is to attain from them. Thus, one can say which does what, and in reference to Pure Land, they will realize it is not intermediate (Bardo) experiences, which mean nothing. Just to say if they were a Bardo experience, would that mean there is no benefit whatsoever? Since it isn't Bardo, we can look at past masters of Pure Land and their teachings, thoroughly, from every culture to truly understand, since the conscious mind wants to grasp and things and take things apart. In such a case as to actually apply and practice Pure Land, and actually do what is required under this Dharma Door, one will attain their goal, fulfill the practice and be sure to let those with affinities for that practice know the deal. But by no means is it a petty, Bardo experience with no way of attaining nirvana.

I speak in the Buddhist concept. Spiritual powers and the like are inevitable after the mind has been cleared of false thinking. What is known as spiitual is actually quite normal once the mind is illuminated. Whatever the Buddha said of the realization of Buddhahood, that's what I mean. He spoke all that we have in Buddhism, so whether it be 'Mahayana, Theravada, Chan, etc" that's what I am talking about. The teachings don't contradict unless the cultivator doesn't realize that they are all expedients for specific capacities of mind. For one group, "Theravadan" works, for another "Mahayana". What do they have in common? They are the Buddha's teachings. Either one gets one to enlightenment, either one will lead to each other. Just like Catholicism for those who can take it, Judaism for those who fit with it, Islam for that tradition.. Lord Shakra holds many traditions in different forms. isn't it interesting that all those traditions will get one to the heaven involved with those teachings? None of them are better, overall. They have their function for specific capacities of those living beings who can fit with those teachings. The Buddha did the exact same thing. Gave various methods according to various capacities of living beings. Here's what I wrote/quoted in another post on Nirvana: "Nirvana is not necessarily an after-death state. It is the certification to and attainment of a principle. It is a sanskrit word interpreted to mean, "neither produced, nor destroyed". Since it is "neither produced, nor destroyed", birth and death are ended.One reaches nirvana when one reaches the position of not being subject to birth and death. It is not the Buddha's dying. When the Buddha dies, he enters nirvana; he enters and certifies to the principle of nirvana with its 4 virtues of : Permanence, Bliss, True Self, and Purity. Nirvana is emphatically not death." --- Master Xuan Hua End of rebirth is realized, it is an inevitable result from cultivation. Death of the body doesn't make one enter nirvana just because they cultivated the Dharma. It is..."earned" through practice. Immortals can travel anywhere they please, yet Buddha Lands do have a "standard" to get to: Either one's virtue and merit is full and have satisfied that lands specific vibrational resonance, or they go there do to their skill (in practice resulting in pure mind and heart, purified mouth, bod and mind karma) then they get to leave to their respective place of "dwelling". That or a Buddha or Bodhisattva takes you there for a glimpse...lol When the overall goal is to end false thinking, the means can be many, the end is inevitable. just as long as the means does indeed result in the desired "end". For example: I received some students who needed to hear of specific methods to get to their goal, while others could directly take the main principle (function), and go for the gold. Some required recitation, while others required movement and concentration to realize what they wanted. The main application was concentration power building. It is the same in all of Buddha's teachings that in order to succeed, one needs concentration power (samadhi). Even Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva in the Dharani Sutra spoke of Dhyana (Chan), Secret School, and Pure Land. The min application was concentration to end false thinking. Thus is the fundamental stream that is present in all the Buddha's teachings. Medicine Buddha, Sunlight and Moonlight Bodhisattvas, Vajra Trace Dharma Protecting Spirits, etc (all along this line) all apply concentration strength to realize the fruit of Bodhi. It is the underlying method within the expedients they presented to living beings. If the Buddha's teachings on all the methods which were broken up into different schools were false, then none of the various Buddhas and Bodhisattvas would speak the same exact core teaching in their Dharma: Samadhi (Concentration Power).

unless you are of Judaic tradition, feel free to snip away. lol But its not something to recommend. No benefits emotionally, mentally, or anything wise.

lol I appreciate your comments, they pick my "brain"...lol

Understood... yet in PL we want to wake up from dreaming, not induce it.

You may begin to "see" things without the old views you once held. Think of it more as a change of life and mind, instead of having beings come to teach you. Quite frankly, the simple, the better, and "faster" to get you where you want to go. To truly understand and experience what Pure Land Dharma door is all about, practice it, and apply all it is required to truly go further: Faith Vows and Practice. Faith in the Dharma, and in yourself in applying yourself, in trusting yourself that you will indeed succeed. Vows for without them, our mind will go all over and not be restrained from false thinking. Practice, actually practice what the method entails. For one thing, it isn't an intermediate state when modern day people are reciting the Buddha's Name and ending their cycle of birth and death while walking, sitting lying and standing...while standing, their body not tipping over, the same while sitting and walking.. I haven't heard of anyone tripping... hahahaha *** I have never heard the term "Clear Light" in respects to a practice method. Please give reference to such..? :-)

not at all. The inevitable end result in Pure Land Practice is Buddha-hood. States of mind will arise in any practice. Throughout Pure Land Practice, the main goal isn't rebirth in the pure land, it is simply to end false thinking. "Thus, when the mind is pure the land is pure. " 6th Patriarch Hui Neng of the Chan School. This means that everything in between from the beginning of PL practice till one's Buddha hood is about purifying the mind by ending false thinking. The PL of Amitabha Buddha, specifically, is a realm that hosts none of the laws of relativity we have, nor is it a realm where one undergoes any type of rebirth. When the mind is pure, meaning no more reliance on false thoughts, there are no more states reliant on influences such as cultivating methods. Thus, what is said to "be" is just that. Amitabha's PL is a place, and yet it isn't. Why is it also not a place? because those who are not ready for it, wont be there. All manners within that sutra are speaking of the true mind. It is a sutra of utmost expedients,

Pure Land practice is nit Bardo at all.

Oh I did not see this before, sorry Dao... Well, principles and theories are totally different. Theories speak on possibility, whereas Principle speaks from a foundation. A theory must be put to use before it can become a fact, thus a principle can be spoken of which leads one to their goal. Principle is the foundation of application: Here is a mannerism to apply, thus your goal would be inevitable. Both must be practiced, or they would be useless. When I speak on focusing on principles, it is in light of applying them, rather than worrying about who did what some time after the Buddha entered nirvana. I take from whatever sutra comes my way and within it, whatever teaching makes sense. It is all Buddha-dharma within the Buddha's teachings. Ven. Ananda compiled the sutras, began each sutra with "Thus I Have Heard". He questioned the Buddha about the discourses he spoke of prior to Ananda's leaving of the home life. Thanks to him, we have sutras to read and contemplate. Mahayana, Hinayana...not important, but said to be so to get living beings to develop a caring heart towards each other, instead of bailing out. Does it matter to stick around? Yes, because there is truthfully no where to go, and no where to remain.

famous quotes by my father: "When men are right, women never remember; when men are wrong, women never forget." hahahahahaha "I intend to live forever. So far so good." "I'm never wrong, but this time I'm right." When hearing someone sigh the word God: "Yes, you called?" When in conversation about the U.S. government; "Those S.O.B.s need to get their heads out their asses." "How can a gov. give another nation the weapons and technology to defend themselves against an invading country, and then turn around and say that defending nation is a terrorist threat?...Oh, right, as long as they have oil it makes sense." About marriage: "My wife yes, my gun maybe, my dog NEVER." His old license plate on his 1970 Buick Convertible: "TOPDOWN" In response to society and T.V.: "People only know one thing to do with their ass, sit on it. they obviously don't know how to wipe it." In response to another's adversity: "I have a problem? My problem with you is that you make it as though its my fault you are an ass$%#@, when you're the one who gave yourself a problem in the first place...arguing with me" HAHAHAHAHA

"Nirvana is not necessarily an after-death state. It is the certification to and attainment of a principle. It is a sanskrit word interpreted to mean, "neither produced, nor destroyed". Since it is "neither produced, nor destroyed", birth and death are ended.One reaches nirvana when one reaches the position of not being subject to birth and death. It is not the Buddha's dying. When the Buddha dies, he enters nirvana; he enters and certifies to the principle of nirvana with its 4 virtues of : Permanence, Bliss, True Self, and Purity. Nirvana is emphatically not death." --- Master Xuan Hua All Buddhist cultivation has everything to do with what Buddhist cultivation entails. It doesn't matter if its in the human realm, Desire Heavens, Animal realms, Hell realms, Demon Heavens, or Brahman Heavens. It doesn't matter which "Pure Land" one chooses to be in or cultivates and arrives in. Dharma is not discriminative, living being are, for they remain accepting a thief as their own son; Accepting the "mind which seizes upon conditions" to be the true mind. Throughout this thread, I have seen less substance, and more erudition, let alone actual principle. There was once a man who believed in studies more than actual practice and had no concentration strength whatsoever. He thought all of that was not necessary, and he could attain realization all through understanding the principles, but not having to actually apply them in practice for the development of concentration strength (samadhi). He almost lost his virtue, but wasa saved by the very thing he thought unnecessary. Anyone know his name, along with the story and reason for that specific teaching? *** Just an add-on: Its quite a read, ENJOY! Quoted from Master Xuan Hua in his commentaries on the Amitabha Sutra, and Shurangama Sutra. This is on the 4 words and Ananda's 4 questions to the Buddha before he gone to Nirvana: The four words Thus I have heard begin all Buddhist sutras. It is Thus; if it were not Thus it would not be correct. This is the doctrine, and Dharma which is Thus can be believed. I have heard. Ananda says that he himself personally heard this teaching. But, having given proof to the fruit of Arhatship, basically Ananda has no ego. How can he say, “I have heard?” This is the “self of noself.” Ananda says, “I have heard” in order to be comprehensible to ordinary people, who have a “self.” Heard fills the accomplishment of the hearer. Why does one have faith? Because one has heard. If one hadn’t heard, how could one have faith? Ananda’s Four Questions The use of Thus I have heard comes from instructions given to Ananda by the Buddha just before the Buddha entered Nirvana: One day Shakyamuni Buddha announced, “Tonight, in the middle of the night, I am going to enter Nirvana!” When Ananda heard this he was so distraught that he cried like a baby for its mother and called, “Buddha, Buddha, please don’t enter Nirvana! Please don’t cast us all aside!” He cried and pleaded until his brain got addled, probably because he thought that this was what he should be doing. Just then a blind man came by, one unlike other blind men. His ordinary eyes were blind, but his Heavenly Eye was open. Because he was blind, he wasn’t burdened with a lot of false thinking, and his mind was very clear. “Venerable One,” he said, addressing Ananda, “Why are you crying?” “The Buddha is about to enter Nirvana,” Ananda replied. “How can I hold back my tears?” The eyeless elder replied, “How can you do your work if you cry? After the Buddha enters Nirvana, we will have to establish many things. There is work to be done and questions to be asked.” “What questions?” said Ananda. “The Buddha is going to Nirvana. What is there left to do? What could be more important than the Buddha’s Nirvana?” The blind man, whose name was Aniruddha, and who was foremost in the capacity of the Heavenly Eye, said, “There are four extremely important matters which must be settled.” “What are they?” asked Ananda. “Compiling the sutras is one,” he said. “With what words should we begin each sutra?” “True!” said Ananda. “That is important. It’s a good thing you brought it up. I never would have thought of it myself. All I can think of is the Buddha going to Nirvana. What is the second question I should ask?” The Venerable Aniruddha said, “We have taken the Buddha as our teacher, but when he goes to Nirvana, who will be our teacher? Should we look for another teacher?” “Right, right!” said Ananda. “We should find another good teacher. You’re quite right. What is the third?” Aniruddha said, “Now we live with the Buddha, but when he goes to Nirvana, where will we live?” “That is very important,” said Ananda. “Without a place to live, how can we cultivate the Way? Should we find someplace else to live? These three matters are extremely important. What is the fourth?” Aniruddha said, “The Buddha can discipline evil-natured Bhikshus, but after he goes to Nirvana, how shall we take care of them?” Now, an evil-natured Bhikshu does nothing but disturb other people. If you meditate, he walks around, “Clomp! Clomp!” making a lot of noise so that no one can enter samadhi. When people are walking, he sits to meditate. “Look at me!” he says. “I sit much better than all of you,” and pretends to have entered samadhi. When people are bowing to the Buddha, the evil-natured Bhikshu likes to recite sutras, and when people are reciting sutras, he likes to bow to the Buddha. In general, he’s got to have a special style – “the evil-natured-Bhikshu style” – and he does not follow the rules. If everyone goes one way, he goes the opposite way. He has no consideration for anyone else, but expects everyone to notice him. “He’s terrific,” everyone says. “He really cultivates.” He insists on being special so that others will notice him and say that he is the best. Fiercely competitive, he must be the strongest, outstanding among the best. He stands like an asura with his hands on his hips as if to say, “See what a great hero I am?” He has to be different and outdo everyone else. When the Buddha was in the world, he could control such evil natured Bhikshus, and they obeyed his instructions. But after he entered Nirvana who would supervise them? And who could control the evil-natured laymen who say, “Look at me. I’m more dedicated than all you other laymen.” Actually, it’s just because of him and his special style that no one else is dedicated. Aniruddha said, “When the Buddha goes to Nirvana, what are we going to do with the evil-natured Bhikshus and evil-natured laymen?” “These are important questions,” said Ananda. “I’ll go ask right away.” He wiped his eyes, blew his nose, and ran off to the Buddha. “Buddha, Great Master,” he said, “I have four questions which I would like to ask you before you go to Nirvana. World Honored One, won’t you be compassionate and answer them?” “All right,” said the Buddha. “Buddha,” said Ananda, “you have spoken many sutras. When we compile and edit them, with what words should they begin?” The Buddha said, “All sutras spoken by the Buddhas of the past, present, and future begin with the words, ‘Thus I have heard,’ which means, ‘The Dharma which is Thus can be believed. I personally heard it.’” Ananda said, “Secondly, you are our Master, but when you enter Nirvana, who will be our teacher? Please instruct us. Should it be Mahakasyapa?” The Buddha said, “No. When I go to Nirvana, take the Pratimoksa, the precepts, as your teacher. To accord with the Buddha’s instructions, those who leave home must first receive the precepts.” Then Ananda said, “We have always lived with you, Buddha, but when you enter Nirvana, where are we going to live?” Shakyamuni Buddha said, “When I go to Nirvana, all Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upasakas, and Upasikas should dwell in the Four Applications of Mindfulness: Mindfulness with regard to the body, feelings, thoughts, and dharmas. Contemplate the body as impure. If you know that the body is impure, you won’t love it, and without love there will be no attachment. Being without attachment is freedom. So first of all, regard the body as impure. Contemplate feelings as suffering. Feelings are all a kind of suffering, whether they are pleasant or unpleasant, for pleasant feelings are the cause of unpleasant feelings. Contemplate thought as impermanent. Thoughts shift and flow and are not permanent. Contemplate dharmas as devoid of self.” Ananda further asked, “How should we treat evil-natured Bhikshus?” The Buddha said, “That is no problem at all. Simply be silent and they will go away. Fight evil people with concentration power. Don’t be moved by them. If they are evil, don’t be evil in return. If a mad dog bites you and you bite him back, you’re just a dog yourself. Evil-natured people are born with a bad temper. All you can do is ignore them and they will soon lose interest and leave.” “Oh,” said Ananda, “it’s really very simple.” Why did the Buddha tell Ananda to use the four words “Thus I have heard?” These four words have three meanings: To distinguish Buddhist sutras from the writings of other religions. Non-Buddhist religions in India began their texts with the words “A” or “O” which means “non-existence” or “existence.” As these opposing religions see it, all dharmas in heaven and earth either exist or do not exist. “If it is not non-existent,” they say, “then it exists, and if it doesn’t exist, then it’s non-existent.” In general, as far as they can see, nothing goes beyond existence and non-existence. “In the beginning there wasn’t anything,” they write, “but now there is.” None of these religions speaks of true emptiness and wonderful existence. Their doctrines may resemble them somewhat, but they don’t explain them in detail. Buddhist sutras are “Thus.” They are just that way. The Dharma is just that way. You ask, “What is not that way?” Everything is that way. If you question it and say, “What is that way?” then nothing is that way. “Thus” is extremely wonderful. The words “Thus I have heard” distinguish Buddhist sutras from the writings of other religions. To resolve the doubts of the assembly. The Buddha knew that everyone would have doubts. After the Buddha’s Nirvana, while Ananda and Mahakasyapa were editing the sutras, Ananda sat on the Dharma-seat to speak the Dharma. Seeing him sitting on the Buddha’s seat, the members of the assembly suddenly gave rise to three doubts: Some thought, “Shakyamuni Buddha hasn’t completed the stillness! He hasn’t gone to Nirvana. Our Master lives!” They thought Ananda was Shakyamuni Buddha come back to life. Others thought, “Shakyamuni Buddha has already entered Nirvana. This must be a Buddha from another direction: north, east, south, or west.” “No,” said others, “the Great Master has gone to Nirvana. He hasn’t come back to life, and the Buddhas of the other directions teach people in other directions. They would never come all the way to the Saha world. Why, Ananda himself must have realized Buddhahood!” The assembly held these three doubts until Ananda said, “Thus I have heard.” As soon as he said them, everyone knew that Shakyamuni Buddha hadn’t come back. They knew it was not a Buddha from another direction, and that Ananda had not become a Buddha. The Dharma which is “Thus” is that which Ananda personally heard from Shakyamuni Buddha. Three doubts suddenly arose and four words resolved them. To end the assembly’s debates. Of all the great Bhikshus, Ananda was the youngest. He was born on the day Shakyamuni Buddha realized Buddhahood, and when the Buddha went to Nirvana, Ananda was only forty-nine years old. Why was Ananda selected to explain and edit the sutras? Old Kasyapa was the eldest, and Maudgalyayana and Shariputra were both of higher status than Ananda. There were many others in the assembly with more Way-virtue and learning than him. He was the youngest and it was likely that no one would believe in him and that many would try to be first. One might say, “I’ve heard more sutras than you so I should explain them.” But when Ananda said, “Thus I have heard,” everyone knew that these were not Ananda’s principles, or the principles of the Great Assembly. “This is the Dharma which I, Ananda, personally heard the Buddha speak. It is not your teaching and not my teaching; it is our Master’s teaching. You are not first and I am not first.” This silenced the assembly’s debates.

"Bardo", or intermediate states, are just intermediate while still relying on the conscious mind "the mind which seizes upon conditions". Everything experienced is a state which ends until the discriminative mind is put to rest. The Pure Lands, if experienced by the cultivator while with a body, will appear as states indeed, yet when there is enough skill in means, when one's mind has reached a point of a purity in resonance with that of any of the Pure Lands, after one is done with their body, when their life comes to an end, and their cultivation is sincere, the cultivator will indeed, according to their vows and practice, in the Pure Land of Their mind. It is not a state at that point, nothing intermediate, and no its not a heaven. If it was a heaven, the cultivator would still be turning in the 6 paths of rebirth. If it were a state, the cultivator will still be subject to birth and death. The Buddha Speaks the Amitabha Sutra points it right out and simple, and Amitabha Buddha's vows and direction speak plain and clear about this. Its unfortunate that after the Buddha finished with his body,, generations after have misunderstood and even looked down on these teachings. So much in that the Buddha said it is the simplest method, yet no one will believe it. Thus it is a most difficult method in this reference. If anyone is truly interested in understanding the Pure Land Dharma Door, instead of reading from those who have no clue, why not seek out a Good and Wise Adviser, preferably those who have left home and have the capacity to explain such Dharma. There is Master Jing Kong, there is Master Xuan Hua, and their disciples. Even try to contact Venerable Wu Ling, disciple of Master Jing Kong. She is on Facebook (Ven. Wu Ling - I believe). I met her a few times, and had my disciple work with her on some illustration projects. My disciples have met her and chatted up a storm about various Dharma of Buddhist Education.