Buddhism transcends the Tao

[cricketty-rise]

i always saw original taoism as more natural than buddhism. it seems more 'human' and should we really strive to pretend to be anything else?

[Siliconvalley1]

Cricketty-rise, awesome and really unique Avatar

[Marblehead]

i always saw original taoism as more natural than buddhism. it seems more 'human' and should we really strive to pretend to be anything else?

 

Yeah, I almost decided to try walking a path of a mixture of Buddhism and Nietzscheism (I just made up that word) but decided to try walking the Taoist path instead.

 

Be well!

[Wayfarer64]

The more I read of Krishnamurti- the better I like what he said!

 

His take-

 

" Let us examine how we have created religions and in what manner we are enslaved to them. If you deeply examine them as they are, you will see that they are nothing but the vested interest of organized belief- holding, seperating, and exploiting man."

 

Sounds like truth to me!-

Love to all- Pat

[Vajrahridaya]

i always saw original taoism as more natural than buddhism. it seems more 'human' and should we really strive to pretend to be anything else?

 

Buddhism doesn't strive to help you be anything other than what you truly are. As well as help you realize your highest potential as a human being. All this... "oh I'm just natural and go with the flow." Nature follows the impulse of fear of death. That's the impulse behind evolution and war. Go ahead the follow the natural flow of Samsara and see where it leads you?

 

There are two natures, the nature that follows material identity and the nature of following the true nature of all things beyond the material, but of which the material is an expression of. The nature of consciousness itself is what Buddhism helps one to realize.

 

 

 

The more I read of Krishnamurti- the better I like what he said!

 

His take-

 

" Let us examine how we have created religions and in what manner we are enslaved to them. If you deeply examine them as they are, you will see that they are nothing but the vested interest of organized belief- holding, seperating, and exploiting man."

 

Sounds like truth to me!-

Love to all- Pat

 

 

It takes wisdom and method to realize the nature of things. Not just a whole bunch of neat sounding words.

 

Krishnamurti was a nice person, but he does a diservice because he helps people away from traditions of enlightened masters which truly help people to realize human potential. Of course if we were all enlightened, we wouldn't need any tradition. But that's just wishful thinking and not practical isn't it? That's the problem with Krishnamurit, he's totally unpractical. Though, he has some insight, I give him that and he's right from only a certain perspective. But it's not wholistic and has no real methods other than a set of logics one can run around in the head in hopes to realize a state of pure perception. But, I haven't seen that happen with any of his pushers.

[Wayfarer64]

Buddhism doesn't strive to help you be anything other than what you truly are. As well as help you realize your highest potential as a human being. All this... "oh I'm just natural and go with the flow." Nature follows the impulse of fear of death. That's the impulse behind evolution and war. Go ahead the follow the natural flow of Samsara and see where it leads you?

 

There are two natures, the nature that follows material identity and the nature of following the true nature of all things beyond the material, but of which the material is an expression of. The nature of consciousness itself is what Buddhism helps one to realize.

It takes wisdom and method to realize the nature of things. Not just a whole bunch of neat sounding words.

 

Krishnamurti was a nice person, but he does a diservice because he helps people away from traditions of enlightened masters which truly help people to realize human potential. Of course if we were all enlightened, we wouldn't need any tradition. But that's just wishful thinking and not practical isn't it? That's the problem with Krishnamurit, he's totally unpractical. Though, he has some insight, I give him that and he's right from only a certain perspective. But it's not wholistic and has no real methods other than a set of logics one can run around in the head in hopes to realize a state of pure perception. But, I haven't seen that happen with any of his pushers.

 

Hey Vajra, are you channeling Denty!?

[Siliconvalley1]

Hey Vajra, are you channeling Denty!?

 

 

Naaw.. I don't think so

 

S Denty wrote

 

- longer posts,

- more frequently,

- replied to all that didn't agree with him and not only to those posts which he thought were easy to respond to and - wrote something new in every post without sounding too much like a broken record ...

 

It would be fun to have a - I am better than you - or - mine is better than yours - debate between the two though... Its amazing to see how similar the two are ... ROFL

Edited July 13, 2009 by Siliconvalley1

[Meson]

[Vajrahridaya]

Hey Vajra, are you channeling Denty!?

 

Who?

 

 

Personally, I think his logic was profound, he spoke mostly of love. It depends what side you like your toast buttered I guess.

 

I think he was a good guy. He certainly was animated and hopped up on what he was saying though. I nice sense of loving pride emanated from him. Not enlightenment though. He was a pretty smart dude, but he did have personal life problems.

 

Not that I don't, but I'm also not selling any books and giving live talks in front of hundreds to thousands of people, nor am I debating with highly realized lineage holders.

 

Maybe someday though?

[Meson]

Edited July 14, 2009 by Meson

[Unconditioned]

[Vajrahridaya]

Edited July 14, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Lucky7Strikes]

Krishnamurti's message was simple...

 

LISTEN!

 

OBSERVE!

 

THINK!

 

His teaching is not impractical. He urged people to break through the conditioned mind and to always question.

 

But when one has abandoned the true guru within himself....

 

The beauty of Taoism is not in following the "natural" ways, but letting nature and the existent condition be the ultimate guide. The sutras, scriptures, gurus, etc. are all secondary sources.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

The beauty of Taoism is not in following the "natural" ways, but letting nature and the existent condition be the ultimate guide. The sutras, scriptures, gurus, etc. are all secondary sources.

 

That's nice... Buddhism doesn't think Samsara is a very good guide, unless one has a good teacher to show how Samsara is really Nirvana in disguise.

[xenolith]

That's nice... Buddhism doesn't think Samsara is a very good guide, unless one has a good teacher to show how Samsara is really Nirvana in disguise.

No teacher is required moron.

 

Lucky you are correct.

[Vajrahridaya]

No teacher is required moron.

 

Lucky you are correct.

 

Yes, a teacher is required. Because we are so conditioned by subjective outlook and endless cycling through this that we can't even look in the mirror objectively. Each one teaches one how to be self reliant who then teaches others. But, a teacher is most definitely required and extremely necessary. Even if we on our own attain very high states of realization, we can also be deluded by these very high states.

 

Yes, I'm lucky that I'm correct.

[mat black]

Yes, a teacher is required. Because we are so conditioned by subjective outlook and endless cycling through this that we can't even look in the mirror objectively. Each one teaches one how to be self reliant who then teaches others. But, a teacher is most definitely required and extremely necessary. Even if we on our own attain very high states of realization, we can also be deluded by these very high states.

 

Yes, I'm lucky that I'm correct.

Agree & well said. Teachers are indeed necessary.

[Gerard]

Teachers are required because they help us to see that our egos are constantly feeding in our beliefs as well as the delusional state many practitioners live. I realised about this delusion I was stuck in before I went to me first serious retreat. My teacher gave me a "good slap in the face". Gerard, you are not a special person here, you have no more value than the dust of the floor you walk on. Wake up, practice hard and don't ask questions about the Dharma: just freaking do it! Prostrate...walk..sit...prostrate...sit...walk....and remain silent. You talk to much to other practitioners, and yes I did! Next time I will keep my mouth shut and focus on Vipassana.

 

I really appreciate this harsh and awakening approach. Good teachers are Dharma punks not Dharma "my little ponies"

 

 

 

telling us how good and beautiful we are! I personally recommend retreats in Asian countries (my direct experience is northern Thailand) where no one gives a damn about your royal ass!

 

One more thing, what is not needed are the constant insults that I have seen of late in the forum. Please work on that a bit.

 

To sum up neutral karma, neither kissing each others bums nor personal attacks.

Edited July 15, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[Lucky7Strikes]

That's nice... Buddhism doesn't think Samsara is a very good guide, unless one has a good teacher to show how Samsara is really Nirvana in disguise.

 

Samsara is not a good guide?

 

 

Buddhism says that? Really?

 

Really...?

Edited July 15, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[Josh Young]

If teachers are required, who was Buddhas teacher?

[Lucky7Strikes]

Gerard, you are not a special person here, you have no more value than the dust of the floor you walk on. Wake up, practice hard and don't ask questions about the Dharma: just freaking do it! Prostrate...walk..sit...prostrate...sit...walk....and remain silent. You talk to much to other practitioners, and yes I did! Next time I will keep my mouth shut and focus on Vipassana.

 

I really appreciate this harsh and awakening approach. Good teachers are Dharma punks not Dharma "my little ponies"

 

telling us how good and beautiful we are! I personally recommend retreats in Asian countries (my direct experience is northern Thailand) where no one gives a damn about your royal ass!

 

One more thing, what is not needed are the constant insults that I have seen of late in the forum. Please work on that a bit.

 

To sum up neutral karma, neither kissing each others bums nor personal attacks.

 

I have nothing against teachers and I myself want to learn from wise masters. But I don't think I need a teacher to tell me I have no value than the dust of the floor I walk on. I can just go strolling in the graveyard for that. And if I had to choose, I'd rather meditate among the tombstones than have some guy tell me that life is impermanent.

 

Ultimately the two ways of learning are not at all different.

 

Why, why, why is so much importance placed upon a single guru? It shouldn't be so.

 

BTW,

 

I think the insults are fine. No one gives a damn about whose ass is royal or not! .

[Marblehead]

Well, in the event you need a little moral support, I totally agree with this:

 

I have nothing against teachers and I myself want to learn from wise masters. But I don't think I need a teacher to tell me I have no value than the dust of the floor I walk on. I can just go strolling in the graveyard for that. And if I had to choose, I'd rather meditate among the tombstones than have some guy tell me that life is impermanent.

 

Be well!

[Unconditioned]

Yes, a teacher is required. Because we are so conditioned by subjective outlook and endless cycling through this that we can't even look in the mirror objectively. Each one teaches one how to be self reliant who then teaches others. But, a teacher is most definitely required and extremely necessary. Even if we on our own attain very high states of realization, we can also be deluded by these very high states.

 

Yes, I'm lucky that I'm correct.

 

And then we could be conditioned by the teacher's outlook.

 

Can we see objectively at all? Is that even possible? Thoughts are formed from what we perceive and what we perceive is looked at through the lens of our thoughts. I'm not so sure it's possible to have any objective thoughts.

 

Like any forms, a teacher can become an attachment. Relying on them to 'tell you the answer', or provide the right direction, or to blindly accept based on our perception of their attainment, etc. is a common pitfall of spiritual people (in my limited experience including myself).

 

Why do we need a teacher at all? If a teacher advises you to be self-reliant is that the best course of action? I find that generally those who say "you shouldn't have a teacher" tend to have a more optimistic look at other people's abilities and usually don't have a lot of time invested with a teacher whereas those who say "a teacher is required" tend to doubt the natural abilities of others and have invested a lot of time (and/or money) into a teacher. But each side is the same and arguments can be made for both, the point is we're all biased, conditioned by thoughts.

 

So, to the previous posts on this topic, I do not believe a teacher is required however I do see where having one as a aid can provide a benefit but at some point the student must not be dependent or fully accepting of the teacher otherwise it's just a refined version of the telephone game... conditions affecting conditions.

 

Spiritual knowledge is knowledge none the less, the content of the mind. Constant searching could be another form of adding content to the mind and therefor strengthening it which inturn strengthens the sense of self/identity/ego and it's grip.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Unconditioned

[Vajrahridaya]

Samsara is not a good guide?

 

 

Buddhism says that? Really?

 

Really...?

 

Samsara from Samsaric view point without correction from a master teacher leads merely to more samsaric outlook in all it's subtle ways through the 31 planes of existence from formless bliss states to high god states to whatever... on and on. There are rare beings who having been taught dependent origination in past lives and having reached high states of awareness can have some spontaneous revelations at early ages on their own. But, even these beings are humble enough to look for a teacher.

 

It's just prideful to say... "I don't need a teacher, I can do this on my own, humph". That generally doesn't show much ability to really transform on a deep level.

[Vajrahridaya]

If teachers are required, who was Buddhas teacher?

 

According to Mahayana, he was taught in a higher loka even before he incarnated here. But, he as a wandering ascetic learned the highest states of absorption through the jhanas into the jhana of beyond perception and non-perception from two Indian Gurus named Alara Kalama and then Uddaka. Through these teachers he was able to at will enter into the Samadhi's of infinite consciousness, infinite space, infinite nothingness and beyond perception and non-perception. If even he was humble enough to learn from Master teachers into these highest states of meditative absorption, then what say you? Of course, through moving on and sitting under the Bodhi Tree by himself, contemplating these different states and life itself, he came to realize a deeper truth which he called "An ancient path". He realized Dependent Origination and the living, walking meditation style of Vipassana which must go hand in hand with Samatha and the Jhanas.

 

The Buddha is considered a Wheel Turning Buddha, who starts the wheel of the Sanatana Dharma turning. He had a specific function and he learned this function before he even incarnated here. Of course, he incarnated willfully and he set up his display of being ignorant in order to function in the world, then to go out searching, to find teachers, then to learn enough to realize on his own. As everyone must realize on his own, but we do need teachers to bring us to the water that only we can drink.

 

We are also generally speaking not as fortunate as the Buddha was. He had enough merit to have a King as a father who showered him with all the pleasures a son could have, and even kept him from seeing, old age, death, dying and disease. So that when he finally did leave the court at 35, he was shocked to even see that old age, death, and disease even existed and was so shocked that he had to find out the way out of this cycle of birth and death.

 

Be honest with yourself, do you have this kind of merit? Even one with that level of merit went to find Masters of meditation.