Tibetan_Ice

Neither do you. Alwaysoff, you don't even know what rigpa means. (maybe if I repeat it, it will sink in.. ) Here, I will repeat it for you: Rigpa: (the recognition of) awareness, whereupon the ground of being become evident, with the true nature of mind present as the dynamic energy of that awareness; its "ground aspect" is awareness of the fundamental nature of the ground of being; its "path aspect" is the ongoing experience of unsullied, lucid awareness awareness (CS); cognitive excitation, wholeness in ecstatic intensity, cognitively intensificatory (FRC); immediate awareness, state of contemplation (GL); pure awareness (KB, NJ, PC); pure cognitiveness, non-representationaly cognitive (KB); innate wisdom or wakefulness, pure presence, primordial being (NGP); awareness (NS, WPT); a flash of awareness, flash on knowing that gives awareness its (illumining) quality (PE). For a reference to the sources of each definition, see this link: http://thetaobums.com/topic/26115-further-discussion/?p=463151

Well then, are you saying that Tsongkhapa, intelligent, accomplished Buddhist teacher, actually unknowingly channeled demons?

Alwaysoff, I think your problem is that you fail to recognize what is actually happening. Alan Wallace gives Dzogchen retreats where he teaches the basics of shamatha, and then gives the oral transmission from Padmasambhava out loud, then leads guided meditations to enforce the teachings including awareness of awareness all the way up to loving kindess meditation. Here is a link to the retreat: http://archive.org/details/IntroductionToDzogchenRetreatWithAlanWallace2012 Here is a list of notes that I have put together from that retreat: ( I skipped 1 to 3, have to go back and do those too when time permits) 4 two guided meditations. Compares life to a dream. Mode of existence. Three mundane jewels: wealth power and fame... Valueless at death. People on retreat 5 One guided breath meditation. General talk about minor benefits of meditation, watching the breath, no breathing during cell phone- checking email, dalai lama and soft cushion on chair. 6 Talks about relaxation, stability and vividness Anti-effort The 8 concerns -abandon hinderances 7 shavasana corpse posture One silent meditation 25 min. 8 two silent sessions are skipped Talk is about questions and answers. Dissolving coarse mind during meditation. Personal identity is dissolved. Fear and get over it. Death and the substrate consciousness. Length of sitting times Background of Theravada Sleepitate 　 9 start of watching thoughts as per Dzogchen Two good guided meditations Architecture of dharmadatu rigpa, microcosm, macrocosm 　 10 wonderful visualization meditation eyes partially open Space of the mind 11 two meditations Talk about shamatha All practices have limitations Defines Dzogchen as beyond stages of generation and completion 12 silent meditation only 25 min 13 2 meditations cut off Questions and answers Substrate dissolve into Prana accumulates in heart, throat xfor dreams, etc Senses dissolve Tummo, dissolving into central channel, subtle mind, Do absolutely nothing then the winds will dissolve into the central channel and go to the heart drop but it is not easy. Path: shamatha vipassana trecko thodgal rainbow body How to check out past lives by using the substrate Remember what u had for lunch a year ago Buddhagosa 　 14 five obscurations whole path Lots on path (if you had to listen to just one, I would pick this one). 15 can't practice Dzogchen from a coarse mind, first gear One meditation silent session 16 history and commonality of rigpa, arahats science luminous bliss unborn unceasing Vidyadata unborn unceasing resting in rigpa Prajnamitra the nature of existence is clear light Franklin Merrell-Wolff There is no Buddhism in Dzogchen 17 pointing out instructions meditation 18 getting the view. Dreams clarity emptiness. First insight is often dull. A spacious path to freedom Karma Chagme. Stories about reincarnation and mundane psychic powers 19 two silent meditations Spaced out danger: Must be a flow of knowing Lucid dreaming Really excellent talk about bliss, shamatha, stability, rigpa, the progression... 20 calichakra tantra Rainbow body Stories about masters Industructible drop at the heart 21 awareness of awareness on second meditation Invert and expand awareness From padmasambhava. Book called Natural Liberation Develop introspection Do you need a guru? Relationship to the guru 22 one guided meditation on being aware of being aware Center then release and repeat 23 No meditations Question and answers Stories about rainbow body and cremation Talks about continual knowing, Vividness luminosity, subtle thoughts, Insomnia- 24 two meditations second is guided. Phase 2 of awareness of awareness. Talks about Richard Geer and reifying gurus 25. One silent session Talking starts at 26 minutes questions and answers Cultivating introspection By stage 8 you don't introspect anymore question about prayer 26 two meditations : second is guided 27 one meditation session silent Q&A location of awareness 28 Two meditations are cut Q&A Levels of practice Rumination is grasping Cat and elephant in a pool of water 29 general advice two meditations, one silent Second is "shamatha without a sign" guided -starts at 34:50 Meditation: calm mind with breath, focus awareness without an object up, then return, then right, return, left, return then take an elevator down to the heart. Then expand awareness in all directions without an object Then come back to the center. Meditation is from padmasambhava "natural liberation" Talks about death 30 loving kindness meditation

Hi Manitou I don't think that was me. You know, I have all the Casteneda books, and when I first read them back in 1972, I practiced most of the practices. I did succeed in finding my hands in dreams and had wonderful mind-blowing experiences in those dreams. I also had my own power spot and practised allot of gazing out the sides of my eyes. It was such fun. Using death as an advisor, the gait of power, becoming a hunter, erasing personal history, Tales of Power!, the nagual and tonal, it was all so cool and mind-blowing. I really did get allot out of those practices. Then, later in life I learned that Casteneda was a fraud, that there was no Don Juan. I was heart broken and sad. But then I realized that I did get great benefit from the practices, even if Carlos did steal the essential theory from library books of honest traditions. And now I've come to realize that those practices and philosophies have been around for ages, you just have to find them in books.

Gee, Alwaysoff, are you saying that Manjursri's writings do not represent true Buddhist teachings? And that is why one must avoid Tsongkhapa? Have you ostracised Manjursri now? Well perhaps you should read "BuddhaHood Without Meditation", because in it, there is a chapter of when Dudjom Lingpa met Manjurshri. What could a whole chapter of something Manjurshri said to Dudjom Lingpa in a 'vision' be doing in a book about The Great Perfection? page 117: ?

Alwaysoff, I never said that. Liar. Either you can't understand what I wrote or you really don't understand the implications of dissolving visualized beings into one's sushumna. This is what I wrote: http://thetaobums.com/topic/30749-bias-against-new-age/?p=462001 I did not say that Guru Yoga was spirit channeling. First off, in channeling, you do not invite the visualized being into your body, down into your sushumna or otherwise. That would be called 'mediumship'; letting a being/spirit/entity take over your body. In channeling, you act as a go-between between the entity/spirit/being and your own consciousness. What I was concerned about is that I have seen many demons disguised as everyday normal looking people in the astral planes, so there is always a possibility that who you think you've visualized or called up isn't exactly who you think you are getting. I won't even communicate with any spirits/entities/beings unless I can feel it in my heart that they are the real thing. And even then, if I have the slightest doubt, I will ask for some help and protection from my 'higher being', like YOU KNOW WHO. (that entity you keep saying doesn't exist). So, unless you learn about these things and know what you are talking about, you shouldn't go around slandering people just because you think you are right. TI

Alwaysoff, Now that is 'complete shit' as you put it. In the first podcast called "01 Dzogchen Retreat Day 1 afternoon part 1", Alan Wallace says himself in the Dzogchen retreat this (at 1:23:00): Alan recounts that Gyatrul Rinpoche said to Alan "Alan, you can teach everything that I am teaching. All the levels of Dzogchen, you can teach it all. Everything I am teaching you can teach..." Alan continues: "I have been teaching it for about 20 year now, with the permission of Gyatrul Rinpoche, my primary Dzogchen teacher, his holiness the Dalai Lama, my primary teacher. ". http://archive.org/details/IntroductionToDzogchenRetreatWithAlanWallace2012 http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Gyatrul_Rinpoche Gyatrul Rinpoche (b. 1925) is a senior lama of the Palyul lineage of the Nyingma school of Tibetan Buddhism. Do you think Alan Wallace is lying, as you have just intimated. ?

Hi Apech, This is a public forum. People should not be subject to abuse, caustic remarks, arrogance and pithy statements that don't explain anything other than to make people feel ignorant and stupid. Further, they should not have to put up with anti-religious statements, hatred, spiritual elitism and the constant pile of shit that Alwaysoff dishes out. You do not have to be a Dzochenpo or have a transmission in order to discuss the teachings. Various Dzogchen teachers have said this, including CN Norbu and Alan Wallace. It is not the Spirit of Dzogchen, nor is it the Spirit of Buddhism. Further, Alwaysoff has never disclosed whether he has had a transmission, from whom, and to what lineage his samaya binds him (if any of this is actually true) so I don't see any reason why he feels that anyone would have to prove their spiritual lineage in order to discuss any topic on this forum. It is the moderators fault that Alwaysoff gets away with his crap. http://thetaobums.com/topic/30749-bias-against-new-age/?p=462913 And thanks for feeding the bear. TI

Alwaysoff, Gee, you must be mistaken. Or perhaps William Mckay is not a Hindu? You certainly chose the Sankrit meaning of the term 'rigpa'. This is directly from the "BuddhaHood Without Meditation" book: and here the references to the letter codes for the multiple meanings of the term 'rigpa'.. So, we can clearly see that in Sanskrit the meaning is vidya, which means 'knowledge'. But look at all those other definitions. Who says yours is right? And just so you are aware, the first definition references the "CS" source. The "CS" stands for "Circle of The Sun" . But you knew that, right? being a scholar and all...

Hi SOT, Oh my! I think this is a new batch that I haven't listened to.. ! Thanks. I have the Spring 2012 and Fall 2012 from the SB Institute, but this appears to be a whole bunch of broadcasts that I haven't heard before.. Thanks! That link actually doesn't have a period on the end.. This one works. http://archive.org/details/ShamathaRetreatWithAlanWallace2012 Rainbowvein, as to which podcast has the mention about dissolving into the heart, I don't know yet.. TI

Hi Steve, Well, yes, there is allot of misinformation out there about rigpa. Most fail to distinguish between the son rigpa and the mother rigpa. The common error that all those sources all make, is that they don't differentiate between the two. They make it sound like you just notice the space between two thoughts and that is rigpa. Well, it is good for beginners but there is allot more to it than that. Yes, I even pointed out the Berzin Archives because he too missed the distinction. These are my reasons: 1) First off, there is no gap between thoughts. If you perceive a gap or space between two thoughts, you just haven't gotten deep enough. You are just sitting on the surface. There is no gap or space between thoughts. As you get deeper, you will see thousands of thoughts. 2) If realizing rigpa were so easy, so simple, then why would Alan Wallace make such a big deal about attaining shamatha before you can break on through to recognize rigpa? Alan Wallace is talking about mother rigpa, the big rigpa. The one he describes as "impossible to miss", "a major event" and "lots of bliss, joy, clarity...". 3) If mother rigpa, the big rigpa were so easy to recognize, why must a Dzogchen practitioner have a transmission for that? And why must it be shown to students? And then why do so many students miss it? It is very easy to recognize that you are aware. It is too easy to recognize that you are aware. Here are some writings from Alan Wallace about rigpa. Note that he calls it the dharmakaya: In this next quote, he actually calls rigpa Buddha Nature: more.. more.. just being aware of thoughts or gap between thoughts is not rigpa.. And he even says that Dudjom Lingpa ridicules the marmot practice.. Here, the mind must dissolve into the substrate consciousness as Dudjom Lingpa describes: It takes months or even years of full-time shamtha practice.. Now tell me again that the space between two thoughts is this type of rigpa.. ? However, the book "Vivid Awareness" uses the term rigpa as simply "awareness": There is no mention of viewing awareness from a non-dualistic perspective in that book. It seems that rigpa is a kind of generic term and is does not have a consistent meaning with reference to Buddism or Dzogchen. You know, I could not find a reference to where Milarepa said that quote, except for one web page where it claimed that he said that.. http://www.thebuddhadharma.com/web-archive/2012/2/10/two-great-paths.html It is an interesting page. It also says this on that page: Back to Milarepa.... However, I did find a more elaborate quotation from Milarepa and it says this: http://medicinebuddhasangha.org/teachings/milarepa.html So, I think Milarepa is saying not that the gap between two thoughts is rigpa, but that the state where thoughts arise yet there is no grasping is the state to remain in. But it does seem that Alan Wallace and Dudjom Lingpa are calling rigpa the big event where most others are calling ripga just normal awareness.. Isnt' Buddhism fun? I've rather enjoyed this little excursion. It helps me keep my dharma up.. TI

Hi SoT That is awesome! I was going to recommend, did you try one of the earlier breath meditations as suggested by Alan that was putting more attention on the out-breath and then letting go at the bottom of the out-breath? Waiting for the in-breath to kick in? The more relaxed the body is through letting go, the more the nimittas appear. Also, try to really relax and let go of your brow muscles, your nose and face. That really helps too. Just a suggestion.

Well, er, this is complex subject. I assume that you mean within the context of the idea that you create your own reality through your belief system. On the higher level, the book "Buddhahood Without Meditation" reveals the key to realizing emptiness which is that you and all the forms found in normal existance do not have any identity. The forms, and normal reality do not exist. You do not exist. There is nobody whom has ever been born, nor has there ever been anyone that has or will die. In this case, what you are being asked to accept is based on a few things: 1) You are being told that this is so, 2) There is a justification that there is no difference between the substance of past dreams and past events. 3) If you look really hard, you will not find anything that you can call 'your identity'. Therefore, in the book, the method of attempting to alter your belief system is through the written/spoken word along with examples and logic. There is also mention that most people will need a transmission from a realized guru in order to grasp the essence of this. And, even then, very few will be able to grasp the essence. I think it is important to distinguish between beliefs and knowledge, and even then gnosis, which is knowledge obtained while in an enlightened state. There is a general theme that beliefs are thoughts that we've blindly accepted without proof or empirical evidence. Or, beliefs can be caused by experiences like when you put your hand in the fire and it burns. After that experience, you belive that every time you will put your hand in the fire in the future, it will burn. Now, let's start at the bottom. What is a belief? A belief is a recurring thought that the voice in your head repeats over and over to you whenever you find yourself in a relative circumstance or situation. Such a thought might be "If I put my hand in the fire it will burn". By believing in the thought, you have limited your reality and are now bound to that belief or thought or piece of knowledge. So how do you change that belief? One day you find a Buddhist book that says that if you perform samadhi on the fire element many times, if you 'realize' the fire nimitta and work with it, if you use your mind empowered by stillness and jhanic states of samadhi, that fire will no longer burn you. What? How does that work? You don't believe. In order to change this belief, I think the only way is to see for yourself, through practice and trial and error. But the qualifications are rather high; you must be able to go into samadhi, you must be able to understand the practice, you must have discipline and willpower, and you must have the correct practice. Then, after dedicating yourself to this practice, finally you arrive at the understanding through empirical evidence that the fire no longer burns. By the way, this is not just conjecture on my part. In the book called the Vissudhimagga, it says exactly how to gain master over the fire element.. So, until you can do the practice and thereby gain the appropriate knowledge, you will start by having the belief that "fire burns your hand", then you will contemplate the idea that "maybe fire does not burn your hand", then you may have the belief that "fire does not burn your hand", then, with faith in the new belief, you will perform the practices and you will come to realize that 'fire does not burn your hand'. At that point, it is no longer just a simple belief, but it is knowledge, or even gnosis. Then, you realize how your belief that 'fire burns your hand' had kept you a prisoner, had limited your reality and that in essence, you were creating your own reality. For simple beliefs, it may be sufficient to just mentally repeat the opposite of that belief, right after the voice in the head produces it. For example, if the voice in your head keeps saying "I'm such an idiot", then, every time you hear that thought, you mentally affirm "I am a wise intelligent being". Eventually the voice in your head, and your lower self will start to believe your new intent. What it all boils down to is the practice of examining the mind, how it works, identifying the components and then learning to play with them. Spend many hours in meditation, just watching the mind. See where the voice in your head appears, and listen to what it says. Watch a thought, or a belief as it appears. Try feeding the thought and see what happens. Try focusing on the content of the thought. Focus on the location of the thought. Then, focus on how big or wide the thought is. Try not giving it any attention at all. See if it dissolves. Watch where it dissolves into. Watch to see where a thought comes from, its source. Watch to see who is watching the thought. Notice how your thoughts put up a kind of barrier or wall that your attention is forced to stop at, to pay attention to. Notice how the longer you merely perceive a thought without grasping or averting at it, that eventually the thought dissolves. Notice how there are thousands and thousands of thoughts, the deeper you go. Notice how the conceptual mind proliferates chains of thoughts when you focus on the content. Notice how the coarse mind collapses into a stream of golden light when you finally succeed at neither grasping or averting your thoughts/visions/emotions/sensations.. Get the picture? Eventually, you might find yourself laughing at the voice in your head, as it spews forth its paranoic garbage and nonsense as it starts to lose ground and control over you. Notice how it may even turn destructive and produce thoughts to make you quit watching it instead of acting on what it produces. I agree with Dawg, the voice in the head is the replicator of karma and is a major hinderance to evolving spiritually. What is your voice telling you? And then there is the obvious. If you don't believe something, try it for yourself. But, you must have an open mind. Your belief that "this is not so" may prevent you from realizing the truth. Some beliefs are embedded so deep in your subconscious that even when you see empircal proof of the opposite of the belief, you still don't believe. Like watching a miracle healing or some other non-ordinary event. It shakes the whole conceptual construct that the I-thought has built up around itself to such a degree that it fears it will lose it's existence, it will lose its security and stable ground. But, as you examine your mind, after you gain sufficient experience, you will come to see that the I-thought is a mental construct of thoughts/memories/values etc, and that the 'real you' is watching that too, so it can't be the 'real you'. Further, you may discover that the 'real you' is located somewhere around the heart and that the mind was a witless child just playing games. TI

Hi Manitou, Thank you for your response. Currently, I let the visions dissolve too. I treat them like thoughts which dissolve on their own too. I have also found that ego is created by thinking, by conceptualization and if that is not occuring, then the ego doesn't play an active role. Thank you so much for the mention about the "Nag Hammadi Scriptures". So far, every time I read your quote, my heart opens a little more and I'm overcome with emotion and longing.. I've been there before and I shall return again.. This part: Perhaps I have found my next book to read.. Thank you! TI

Hi Steve, You said this: I do not believe that Nang Jang is saying to aim at the space between thoughts. It is more like the thing to strive for is the view that nothing truly exists, that everything is empty, and that nirvana and samsara are equal constructs of the 'non-recognition of awareness' due to grasping at identity. I do not recall Alan Wallace ever saying that aiming at the space between thoughts was something to strive for, that that is where rigpa lives. I have had this discussion before in other threads. If Alan Wallace did say that, even with all the conditions that you've stated, I would like to know exactly where he said that. According to Alan Wallace, first you stabilize the coarse mind until you can participate in the finer mind. Then, the finer mind, the substrate consciousness collapses into the substrate. From there, one must break on through to the other side, as Alan puts it, in order to experience rigpa. However, there is another kind of rigpa, that which the Bernzine Archives speak of, which is a sort of child or son rigpa, that type of awareness which is common place and easily recognizable. However, the son rigpa is a small subset and when the realization occurs, it joins 'mother rigpa' which is the type of rigpa that Alan Wallace speaks of. The event, according to Alan is hard to miss.. There is a black out period, it feels like dying or travelling in an unknown... it does not last long. Soon after, the true rigpa appears and you gain realization. However, I believe that Nang Jang is not even concerned with gaps or spaces between thoughts, or between then and now, etc.. As a matter of fact, BWM says that all practices are pretty much useless unless one practices from an understanding of emptiness. The crux is strictly a shift in point of view and then maintaining that point of view. One more comment.. Within this post, I am using the term "ordinary mind" as it is being used in BWM. From BWM: I realize that posting in the Buddhist forum, where the mean ogres live is a potentially hazardous venture, especially if one does not have their terminology quite exact. Many pages have been posted here in an effort to differentiate and segregate, a pastime which I find no pleasure in. My greatest fear is that I may be becoming just like them.. :0 TI

Except when your lama gives you aids.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96sel_Tendzin

Hi C.T. In a word, yes. By visualizing a being/entity in front of you and then dissolving it into your body, either down into the crown or any of the gates, you are opening the door for any kind of entity/deity/being to enter your space. You have invited them/it in. That is not so hard to understand is it? I have seen many demons/entities. Most of them disguise themselves and come and visit you in bed, just before you fall asleep, when you are in transition between the waking and dreaming states. Or, they will try to gain access to your being when you are under tremendous stress, or some kind of traumatic experience. My question was to Alwaysoff, which he neatly avoided. Mediumship is letting some spirit/entity/being take over your body. It is possible, however, to contact spritis/beings/entities in the astral and converse with them, hence channeling information without actually letting them into your body space. But, the first thing you learn is that just because someone is dead, doesn't mean they are enlightened, or benevolent. You know, I had read a story about a seeker who had gained the ability to mold and reshape rock with his bare hands. Everyone thought he was enlightened. One day he went to visit an accomplished master to show him his powers. When the seeker met the master and tried to demonstrate his powers, they no longer worked. Turns out the master knew ahead of time about the pending visit, recognized that the man was possessed by a demon and exorcised the demon before he had arrived. Sorry, I can't find the source at this time, but it sure makes you wonder about lines of transmission and siddhis, doesn't it? TI

Liar. Where exactly do I say that I am a 'self-admitted New Age Christian'? I am none of the sort, nor have I ever said I was. I do not put labels on myself, I am simply a human being having experiences. I am not Christian, Buddhist, Taoist, Islamic.. Your self-centered elitist attitude really sucks Alwaysoff. You can't seem to see past your nose, and that is too bad because you always seem to be looking down your nose at other people and their belief systems.

Hi Apech, I'm not talking about the meditations where you dissolve the deity/guru into space, I'm talking specifically about the ones that say to bring the entity/deity/guru you've visualized into your being.. like this one: http://www.fpmt-osel.org/meditate/buddha.htm or this one: http://www.thubtenchodron.org/PrayersAndPractices/meditation_on_the_buddha.html or this one: http://books.google.ca/books?id=JoRiiHYcClsC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=dissolve+buddha+into+your+body&source=bl&ots=7jlnIqCnVy&sig=u5AhxXLeHWdPRFColnpftxgoccg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_Pj_UeyfG_LSiAKW1IGgBw&ved=0CFkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=dissolve%20buddha%20into%20your%20body&f=false Those are just some links I found on the net. I could go through all my books but I don't want to take the time. I've read this technique all over the place, in many Buddhist meditation practices.. that is what I'm talking about.. TI

Gee Alwaysoff, do you even know the distinction between channeling and mediumship? And let me ask you this.. In the guru practice of visualizing the deity/guru in front of you, and then finally dissolving the deity/guru into your body space as practised by various Buddhists, what exactly do you call that? Aren't you opening the door for hungry ghosts or malevalent beings to enter your space?

Drew, that link is somewhat bizarre.. Malcolm is saying that the central channel is the arterial system.. Why don't you ask Jim Nance if the right vagus nerve is the sushumna? Now that would be interesting, wouldn't it?

Well I'm kind of sad now. There was an excellent discussion about "Buddhahood Without Meditation" going and then a few people, whom obviously never read the book or even tried to understand what Dudjom Lingpa was saying cut in with their own opinions and biases, furthering their own belief systems and bolstering their own egos. Why do people do that? Steve, it is not in 'the gap between thoughts' because (according to BWM) when you are in ordinary mind, marigpa, all phenomenon are obscurred by the non-recognition of awareness. When you are subject to the 'non-recognition of awareness', the normal reality manifests meaning that the five elements manifest. Further, according to this book, "Identity" is the cause of reality, not just the belief that you yourself exists, but that objects and phenomenon have an identity. The minute you perceive an identity, yours or some other object apart from yourself you have solidified your state into the normal ground of being. Recognizing a thought or a gap between two thoughts implies that you, the watcher are still perceiving. A thought is a thought. It has identity. The gap has identity. The "gap between thoughts" is just a misunderstanding that some ignorant meditation teachers teach. What use is recognizing that there is a valley between two waves on the surface of the ocean? The gap is just the manifestation of space caused by the belief in identity. Crucial to these writings is the tenet that the belief of identity, that is, our belief that we exist and other objects actually exist is the cause of our reality. That belief causes the manifestion of the five elements (space, water, fire, earth, air). That belief creates us. So, at the beginning of the book, the chapters tell us that there is no "I", there are no other objects, that everything is in fact empty, and that one must adjust your belief system or view. The BWM goes on to say: And then this: And then, for those of you who think that non-meditation is not just that, on a superficial level, not meditating, perhaps you should read the whole book. But, if you want to disadvantage yourself by not taking the time to read the whole book, then at least read this part: So, there is a form of meditation... sitting like a corpse and doing absolutely nothing, while maintaining the view that all is empty. However, emptiness is not an absence of everything, emptiness is omniscience, it is luminous, infinite and knows all. Most of the quotes I have quoted in this post address some of the posts in this thread, but it is not my job to educate everyone. I would suggest that you get the book and read it. Last comment, Manitou, when you say that you stop your inner dialog, I assume you mean the voice in your head. But, do you classify the visions as a form of inner dialog? I know that the visions also dissolve during meditative-equipose so I was just wondering if you've managed to let the visions dissolve into space as well.. TI

I can see there is no point in talking to you. A still mind does not give insight, which is what is needed to liberate. Shamatha has a second step, that of vipassana (insight). There is a reason why most traditions distinguish between simply stilling the mind and self-inquiry. You don't seem to distinguish between the two. No point in talking to you, you don't have the same language or conceptual framework, nor are you willing to hold your experience out to the light of day.

I prefer to believe the words of enlightened masters rather than scholars or historians.