Running into walls again....ARGH!

[goldisheavy]

Edited October 20, 2009 by goldisheavy

[Lucky7Strikes]

Ok... I'm really tired, I only got a few hours sleep today due to typing and work. I'm going to step off. Whew.

Eh ok... maybe semantics.

 

p.s. Nice debating with you Lucky.

 

Good Night! _/\_

[Vajrahridaya]

[xabir2005]

Ok, I wonder what the original word from the pali is for these translations? Just wondering. I think of luminosity as the conscious awareness of emptiness, then everything is experienced as luminous.

 

That's why I said that. I think of emptiness as being present, but it's recognition is defiled by our clinging to appearances as being stable and true in and of themselves, even our inner interpretations of the experienced.

Wiki:

 

Luminous mind (also, "brightly shining mind," "brightly shining citta") (Pali, pabhassara citta) is a term attributed to the Buddha in the Nikayas. The mind (citta) is said to be "luminous" whether or not it is tainted by mental defilements.[1]

 

-----

 

The luminosity concerns the natural clarity/knowingness of mind which manifests as our sensate experiences. The three aspects in Dzogchen: emptiness (essence), luminosity (awareness), and energy (manifestation) are inseparable but can be distinguished.

 

However I should mention also, recognising the luminosity of mind does not mean one realises its emptiness immediately nor realise its non-duality with all phenomena. This becomes like the I AM experience. In Mahamudra there are four yogas. In short, the first yoga of one pointedness relates to the recognition of the luminuous nature of mind. The second yoga relates to the realisation of emptiness (and the beginning of the path of seeing/first bhumi). The third yoga relates to the realisation of the non-duality of subject and object, that luminosity is present in all experiences without division. Then the yoga of non meditation is the realisation that makes meditation a natural state than something to maintain by effort or strive towards. For a longer, one~two page explanation by Traleg Rinpoche, see http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=OVSsM-...;q=&f=false .

 

 

There's an advice I like from Namdrol:

 

 

You need to just sit and relax.

 

Take a proper posture. Expell the stale air.

 

Do Guru yoga.

 

Then relax. As one's mind slowly subsides, a vivid, clear and energetic radiance will emerge. This is not rigpa itself, but is instead the radiance aspect of awareness. Relaxing in this is the essence of tregchod.

 

If it does not arise-- it doesn't matter-- it is there anyway. If it arises, it doesn't matter, since there is nothing one can do to cause it to arise, nor will it ever subside. But it is revealed when one is sufficiently relaxed.

 

If thoughts occur, it doesn't matter, since thoughts do not exist outside of this state. If there are no thoughts, it doesn't matter, since this radiance is not product of stillness, no more than the lustre of clear water is a product of the settling out of detritus.

 

When one can "see" the radiance of awareness even in the midst of the chaos of concepts, then one's tregchod is moving ahead.

 

Otherwise, just relax and integrate into your primordial state.

 

A few words of advice on tregchod written by a so called "dzogchen pa" named Namdrol.

 

 

There's a summary by Thusness in my forum though I am not sure if he would like it put here (he didn't seem to think it was appropriate when I posted it in my blog):

 

When there is simply a pure sense of existence;

When awareness appears mirror like;

When sensations become pristine clear and bright;

This is luminosity.

 

When all arising appear disconnected;

When appearance springs without a center;

When phenomena appears to be on their own without controller;

This is no doer-ship.

 

When subject/object division is seen as illusion;

When there is clarity that no one is behind thoughts;

When there is only scenery, sounds, thoughts and so forth;

This is anatta.

 

When phenomena appears pristinely crystal;

When there is merely one seamless experience;

When all is seen as Presence;

This is non-dual Presence.

 

When we feel fully the unfindability and unlocatability of phenomena;

When all experiences are seen as ungraspable;

When all mind boundaries of in/out, there/here, now/then dissolve;

This is Emptiness.

 

When interconnectedness of everything is wholly felt;

When arising appears great, effortless and wonderful;

When presence feels universe;

This is Maha.

 

When arising is not caged in who, where and when;

When all phenomena appear spontaneous and effortless;

When everything appears right every where, every when;

This is spontaneous perfection.

 

Seeing these as the ground of all experiences;

always and already so;

This is wisdom.

 

Experiencing the ground in whatever arises;

This is practice.

 

 

 

Here's another explanation on Luminosity by Kalu Rinpoche ( http://www.iol.ie/~taeger/mahamud/mahamud.html ):

 

Another aspect of the nature of mind is its luminosity. Normally we think of this term in a visual sense. We think of a luminous body like the sun or the moon which shines and gives off light. However, this is merely a metaphor to give us some idea of what is being hinted at. To say that the mind is luminous in nature is analogous to saying that space is illuminated. For example, we can have empty space and there might be no illumination; then the space would be obscured. There is space, but no ability to see clearly; there is no direct experience possible in complete darkness. Just as there is clear vision in illuminated space, so in the same way, while mind is essentially empty, it exhibits the potential to know, which is its luminosity. This is not a visual experience per se, but the ability of mind to know, perceive and experience.

Edited October 20, 2009 by xabir2005

[JustARandomPanda]

I am still curious...

 

Does D.O. apply even to Luminosity (including the D.O. one 'light-ray/dusts' for others - does it also help 'light-ray/dusts' itself to be [along with, of course, everyone else's contribution])?

 

I'm having a hard time trying to explain what I'm getting at. I guess...somehow I keep thinking D.O. applies even to luminosity. From what I can tell D.O. emptiness can't be stopped even by luminosity. D.O. - well...it D.O's even itself!

 

That's why I asked if D.O. has a certain recursiveness to it. If so I can see here why Lucky's insistence on the primacy of Mind would work. He's going on the recursiveness of D.O. and calling it luminosity. This effect would dissolve Rang tong and Zhen Tong's seeming separateness. It would be seen for the non-duality it is. It would also explain how we still have free will despite the pull of karma.

 

That's my guess anyway...but perhaps he could explain further.

 

 

By the way - I just realized this is not unlike David Bohm's theories of a holographic-ness to the universe.

[xabir2005]

[JustARandomPanda]

All of the above confirms my current understanding of what I'd posted earlier. It's why awareness exists without an Awarer - for infinite numbers of mind-streams. I noticed how all the bolded text is just saying there's Dependently Originated Awareness. It's lucid, clear, empty and ever-present.

 

Yes...because D.O. never stops D.O.-ing.

 

D.O. is D.O.-ing both others and itself.

 

Now I see why VH keeps saying that to see Dependent Origination is to realize the dharmakaya.

 

However...just to be certain that I'm not somehow missing something or misconstruing something I am going to study the above post carefully and think on them for a while.

[Tao99]

run thru the door ...

Edited October 21, 2009 by Tao99

[JustARandomPanda]

And yes...

 

Just to add the disclaimer.

 

I do realize that the Map (explanations in this thread and in texts) is not the Territory (actual realization in practice).

[xabir2005]

Edited October 20, 2009 by xabir2005

[Vajrahridaya]

Ah, and there I guess lies the parting of the ways for Buddhism and Taoism. "Recognition" of emptiness or anything else is not the liberating factor, which is actually "inconceivable", beyond words and cognitons, beyond recognitions, discoveries, and experiences.

The insight of the Buddhas teachings are beyond being limited by explanation or non-explanation. Through study of sutra one can have spontaneous insight, or by sitting with a liberated master one can have spontaneous insight without the master even saying anything. Just by opening up to the spontaneous presence as the master is the reflection of the meaning of the teaching, the actualization of the moon which the Buddhas finger is pointing to.

 

Recognition fades but realization is permanent.

 

Recognition doesn't fade if one is realized. It's spontaneous in every moment.

 

As such by perceiving things as they are there is no longer grasping arising out of our delusions of the way things are.

 

Yes, when dependent origination is a constant intuitive experience and not a conceptual formulation. It's the realization of the "how" and the "why", so the "what" and the "who" is recognized as liberated.

 

Yup.

 

 

Just to add: one must also know that non-dual luminosity cannot be attained through contrivance and effort but by relaxing into the recognition of the already-present open non-dual luminosity. (Even this statement is not right: non-dual luminosity is not attained, it is simply what IS) That is why the emphasis on non-efforting in Dzogchen and other teachings.

 

That's what I mean by recognizing, but it happens as well through understanding how the experience happens which is D.O. otherwise there is falling into an extreme. Because it's not the experience that liberates, it's the intuitive interpretation of it that liberates.

 

 

 

Awareness or Buddha-Nature is not the same as focused attention or concentration. Awareness is effortlessly happening right now, whether you like it or not, and whether you are paying attention or not.

 

See... Buddha-nature is emptiness, not awareness. Consciousness is effortlessly happening even in unaware modes, whether we like it or not, and paying attention is what awareness is. Awareness is a condition of consciousness. It's the recognizing ability of consciousness through the condition of knowledge or insight.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[xabir2005]

Recognition doesn't fade if one is realized. It's spontaneous in every moment.

Yes, when dependent origination is a constant intuitive experience and not a conceptual formulation. It's the realization of the "how" and the "why", so the "what" and the "who" is recognized as liberated.

That's what I mean by recognizing, but it happens as well through understanding how the experience happens which is D.O. otherwise there is falling into an extreme. Because it's not the experience that liberates, it's the intuitive interpretation of it that liberates.

Agreed and well said

See... Buddha-nature is emptiness, not awareness. Consciousness is effortlessly happening even in unaware modes, whether we like it or not, and paying attention is what awareness is. Awareness is a condition of consciousness. It's the recognizing ability of consciousness through the condition of knowledge or insight.

I realised my definition is not thorough. Buddha-nature is neither awareness nor emptiness. It is defined as the union of luminosity/awareness and emptiness.

 

There must equally be the realisation of non-dual luminosity (note: not recognition or merely experience) as there must be the realisation of emptiness. Without either one falls into eternalism or nihilism.

Edited October 20, 2009 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

Just to add... the realisation of non-dual luminosity will itself overcome an important bond, the bond of 'inside and outside', 'perceiver and perceived'. However this is not the only bond to be overcome.

 

As I wrote some months back in my Buddhist forum:

 

1. The bond of Subject-Object duality: This bond prevents us from the direct experience of anything. It is the sense of a separate self, that is "in here" experiencing something "out there". When hearing the music, it feels that I am an inner experiencer and the music is outside. When non-dual reality is realised, there is no inner-outer division, no me in here and music out there. Just the ISness of the music. You don't hear the music, the music hears. You don't see the scenery, the scenery sees. This is the beginning of seeing through the sense of a separate self, yet there can still be strong grasping on an ultimate unchanging non-dual Self/Absolute.

 

2. The bond of Inherency: There are two levels to the bond of inherency: the bond of seeing self as inherent, and the bond of seeing dharmas as inherent. Insight into anatta/no-self removes the self-bond, insight into dependent origination of all dharmas removes the bond of seeing dharmas as inherent. To remove the bond of non-inherency, apart from practicing naked awareness we need to establish right views.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

I realised my definition is not thorough. Buddha-nature is neither awareness nor emptiness. It is defined as the union of luminosity/awareness and emptiness.

 

That's Buddhahood. Buddhanature is merely the inherent emptiness of a sentient being.

There must equally be the realisation of non-dual luminosity (note: not recognition or merely experience) as there must be the realisation of emptiness. Without either one falls into eternalism or nihilism.

 

Yes, I see your point here on realization, as in actualization. I don't like the word realization so much as a word in this context, because it assumes that there is something concrete happening. Though it's fine I suppose because you are using it as a descriptive of the fact that the recognition of emptiness and luminosity is actualized as a constant reality for the yogi.

 

Sorry about the hurriedness of my previous post... I was being accosted by a women with a severe case of BFADHD. Boyfriend Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

 

 

 

 

Just to add... the realisation of non-dual luminosity will itself overcome an important bond, the bond of 'inside and outside', 'perceiver and perceived'. However this is not the only bond to be overcome.

 

As I wrote some months back in my Buddhist forum:

 

1. The bond of Subject-Object duality: This bond prevents us from the direct experience of anything. It is the sense of a separate self, that is "in here" experiencing something "out there". When hearing the music, it feels that I am an inner experiencer and the music is outside. When non-dual reality is realised, there is no inner-outer division, no me in here and music out there. Just the ISness of the music. You don't hear the music, the music hears. You don't see the scenery, the scenery sees. This is the beginning of seeing through the sense of a separate self, yet there can still be strong grasping on an ultimate unchanging non-dual Self/Absolute.

 

2. The bond of Inherency: There are two levels to the bond of inherency: the bond of seeing self as inherent, and the bond of seeing dharmas as inherent. Insight into anatta/no-self removes the self-bond, insight into dependent origination of all dharmas removes the bond of seeing dharmas as inherent. To remove the bond of non-inherency, apart from practicing naked awareness we need to establish right views.

 

 

That's right, this is why in Buddhism, enlightenment is not a sensation, so we don't chase after a feeling of any sort calling that liberation itself. It's not truth consciousness and bliss (Sat, Chit, Ananda), it's the intuitive interpretation of these that liberates one which is the experience of Dependent Origination, not the conceptual formula. Because one wants to be liberated as well from truth, consciousness and bliss. Though of course the side effect is being a display of the highest truth as a wisdom being, and one is fully conscious of the elements of one's life 24/7 and this is extremely blissful, but it's the calm type of bliss, equanimity.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

"Consciousness is encountered as something more like a field than a localized point, a field that transcends the body and yet somehow interacts with it" (Forman, in Gallagher & Shear, 1999, p. 373).

 

Yes, it feels like everything is in fact made of consciousness, one can see the sparks on a subtle dimension pervading everything, but it's really just awareness of the pure luminosity of the elements intermingling because they are empty and translucent, awareness is experienced as pervading everything. One feels so intimate with everything, even material things feel soft and open, but clinging to this as an identity is the cause of Eternalistic philosophies. Rather intuiting through comprehension of D.O. that all this is the co-generated display of infinite mind streams and the rainbow of elements as a creative matrix leads to the realization of the dharmakaya, not as a transcendent source of all things but as an eminent and infinite field of creative play without beginning or end, the thusness of the flow.

 

Edited October 20, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[xabir2005]

That's right, this is why in Buddhism, enlightenment is not a sensation, so we don't chase after a feeling of any sort calling that liberation itself. It's not truth consciousness and bliss (Sat, Chit, Ananda), it's the intuitive interpretation of these that liberates one which is the experience of Dependent Origination, not the conceptual formula. Because one wants to be liberated as well from truth, consciousness and bliss. Though of course the side effect is being a display of the highest truth as a wisdom being, and one is fully conscious of the elements of one's life 24/7 and this is extremely blissful, but it's the calm type of bliss, equanimity.

The realisation of non-duality is not a sensation, it is the realisation of how awareness/all sensations by nature has never been separated into subject and object division. Realising this non-duality is enough to stop the 'seeking for sensation' because all seeking is the result of feeling separate. Rather in hearing the music there is only just the music hearing itself, there is no one there to accept or reject it. And this is realised to be always already the case and not an altered state of consciousness or a stage of merging with everything. This realisation itself is not the final realisation but it is important to removing the first bond, the bond of duality, as I wrote... However I do agree with what you said regarding D.O. as a subtler realisation free from the notion of a transcendent source.

 

It should also be noted that this non-duality is already the case, and does not require 'actualization' in the sense of reaching a stage of experience or gaining something we don't already possess, but rather the realisation of what is already the case... non-dual luminosity is already spontaneously perfected, or as Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche says: The awareness arising at the first sudden instant (of sense contact) is indeed that pure presence which arises without correction (or modification) and which is uncreated (by causes). This very condition of existence which transcends the limitations of both subject and object is the authentic self-originated primal awareness of pure presence.

 

...

 

The nature of the mind is from the very beginning empty and without a self. Having nothing concrete about it, its aspect which is luminous clarity is unobstructed (and uninterrupted), like the moon reflected on the water. This is that ultimate primal awareness of pure presence within which there is no duality of emptiness and clarity. We should understand that this primal awareness is naturally and spontaneously self-perfected. (The Cycle of Day and Night)

Edited October 20, 2009 by xabir2005

[Lucky7Strikes]

Rather intuiting through comprehension of D.O. that all this is the co-generated display of infinite mind streams and the rainbow of elements as a creative matrix leads to the realization of the dharmakaya, not as a transcendent source of all things but as an eminent and infinite field of creative play without beginning or end, the thusness of the flow.

 

 

 

The clinging to Luminosity happens, as you said, due to misinterpretation of the luminosity as being a part of a greater Luminosity. Which is another dualistic attachment to "This" and a presupposed "Other" beyond one's own immediate experience. The reality is that the contents of Awareness, which is necessary for the Awareness to be and know of its existence, is Dependently Originated. it is dependent on the "creation" that happens in other mind systems. Nothing within experience can arise out of no where even your thoughts and imaginations.

 

Awareness IS dependent on Dependent Origination, but the semantics of "being originated" connote that Awareness is born out of something when that is not the case. It is unborn and eternal. Dualistic eternalism and non-dual eternalism mean very different things in this case. One is still a state of clinging to a separate identity (as in, of the world/of Brahama/of God etc.,) persevering though an outside condition where as the latter is a recognition of all experience as already non-dual.

 

The emphasis is therefore different for each individual. Imho, I think there is an effort on your part to disassociate with the emphasis on non-dual Awareness because of your past roots in Advaita where the experience is interpreted differently. So Dependent Origination complements your understanding in a more effective way, where as some see causes and conditions (emptiness) but not the non-dual aspect.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[JustARandomPanda]

The clinging to Luminosity happens, as you said, due to misinterpretation of the luminosity as being a part of a greater Luminosity. Which is another dualistic attachment to "This" and a presupposed "Other" beyond one's own immediate experience.

 

Yes...this is one of the phase changes I talked about in my Ego Inflation thread. Since Ego finally sees the mechanics of how the personal level of phenomena work but is itself still operating it then inflates - this is the stage where one experiences the Divine. It hasn't yet seen through phenomena on the infinite, macro-cosmic scale. so of course it will ascribe this as being Supreme Divinity - God, Allah, the Supreme Creator, Tao, etc.

[Vajrahridaya]

I can't muster any debate here... time to move on. We all agree!

[Vajrahridaya]

Yes...

 

Are you getting the Transmission from webcast in November?

[zencave]

I can't muster any debate here... time to move on. We all agree!

 

So what was this thread about and Xabir's long posts for? Everysome seems to agree with each other and all are stating the same thing over and over again. And what is funnier is that everyone seems to fully realize that they are all saying the same thing. So why this discussion? For the sake of emphasis or you're all plain showing off how many books and blogs you've read?

 

Serene, it's nice to have questions but don't you think having too many questions and endless debates takes away precious time from practical cultivation? Vajrahridaya, through his statements kind of indicates he has gone beyond practice and is close to the state of Bodhisattva - so he is here talking and teaching all day out of compassion. Possibly he can afford to to that and nothing else infinitely. But is that what newbies such as you or I would want to emulate? Just a thought

Edited October 20, 2009 by zencave

[Lucky7Strikes]

So what was this thread about and Xabir's long posts for? Everysome seems to agree with each other and all are stating the same thing over and over again. And what is funnier is that everyone seems to fully realize that they are all saying the same thing. So why this discussion? For the sake of emphasis or you're all plain showing off how many books and blogs you've read?

 

Serene, it's nice to have questions but don't you think having too many questions and endless debates takes away precious time from practical cultivation? Vajrahridaya, through his statements kind of indicates he has gone beyond practice and is close to the state of Bodhisattva - so he is here talking and teaching all day out of compassion. Possibly he can afford to to that and nothing else infinitely. But is that what newbies such as you or I would want to emulate? Just a thought

 

The approach is different. The way of understanding is different: everyone has a different past and ergo attachments. There is also a different emphasis in language. Vajra had a deep relationship with Advaita so his emphasis is more on not subscribing so readily to the idea of "Oneness," or at least that's my impression. You can read through the words and think "oh yes I think I know what those words mean," but it's always much deeper than that. It's better to understand the way the understanding is arrived at. If it was so easy, the Buddha wouldn't have said so much!

 

Well, at least I have learned much through the development of this thread. My understanding is very raw, but these discussion clarify bit by bit as for the direction of practice and textual (sutra) context. .

 

P.S. Part of the reason I like this forum is because people don't simply accept dogma, labeling themselves of a certain religion, but strive to really understand and apply the material whether it is Kundalini awakening, Buddhism, mystical texts, etc.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[JustARandomPanda]

Serene, it's nice to have questions but don't you think having too many questions and endless debates takes away precious time from practical cultivation?

 

In a word, No.

 

I practice KAP and meditation every day as well. But practice without study of texts is a blind man behind the wheel. Even monks in monasteries (I've read) have debates to help clarify their understanding. This is my online monastery debate forum.

 

It is precisely debates and study of texts like these that led me to the realization of what Dependent Origination is all about. And as a result I now have a tiny dharmakaya tigle - the nila bindu - as VH has confirmed for me (a bit of a story on that). The debaters in this thread I give total credit for granting me some real-world accomplishments to push me on the way to being a realized Buddha - in this lifetime.

 

[Vajrahridaya]

Zencave,

 

 

 

It should also be noted that this non-duality is already the case, and does not require 'actualization' in the sense of reaching a stage of experience or gaining something we don't already possess, but rather the realisation of what is already the case... non-dual luminosity is already spontaneously perfected, or as Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche says: The awareness arising at the first sudden instant (of sense contact) is indeed that pure presence which arises without correction (or modification) and which is uncreated (by causes). This very condition of existence which transcends the limitations of both subject and object is the authentic self-originated primal awareness of pure presence.

 

 

Zencave,

 

See for instance. Me and Xabir here are talking about the same truth. But, he likes the word realization for the same reason I like the word actualization and dislikes actualization for the same reason I dislike realization, though I have used both many times for the same reason. See to me, the word actualization is seeing what's actually here and does not refer to stages at all, but is just being what is actual.

 

For me, the term realization denotes making something real that once was not real.

 

So... words are tricky in English because it's not an inherently spiritual language like Sanskrit. We are all here trying to understand through a very materialist language on this board and in our English speaking lives for the most of us at least who live in English speaking countries.

 

It's nice to discuss things and clarify understanding. This is actually part of my practice. I don't see why people think that this is not a part of cultivation? For me, even watching TV or a movie, or going dancing is part of cultivation and celebrating spirituality. I used to think that I must stop watching TV and dancing and going to movies, stop having sex, hanging out with people. This is true that this is a very necessary stage in development, to renounce all these worldly things because one is experiencing them from a worldly vision. But, once a spiritual vision is established, all activities are experienced as meditative development. My main practice is Mantra Yoga and Guru Yoga by the way and remaining in Rigpa, even if my body isn't feeling it. Integrate, integrate, integrate!

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

Zencave,

Zencave,

 

See for instance. Me and Xabir here are talking about the same truth. But, he likes the word realization for the same reason I like the word actualization and dislikes actualization for the same reason I dislike realization, though I have used both many times for the same reason. See to me, the word actualization is seeing what's actually here and does not refer to stages at all, but is just being what is actual.

 

For me, the term realization denotes making something real that once was not real.

 

So... words are tricky in English because it's not an inherently spiritual language like Sanskrit. We are all here trying to understand through a very materialist language on this board and in our English speaking lives for the most of us at least who live in English speaking countries.

 

It's nice to discuss things and clarify understanding. This is actually part of my practice. I don't see why people think that this is not a part of cultivation? For me, even watching TV or a movie, or going dancing is part of cultivation and celebrating spirituality. I used to think that I must stop watching TV and dancing and going to movies, stop having sex, hanging out with people. This is true that this is a very necessary stage in development, to renounce all these worldly things because one is experiencing them from a worldly vision. But, once a spiritual vision is established, all activities are experienced as meditative development. My main practice is Mantra Yoga and Guru Yoga by the way and remaining in Rigpa, even if my body isn't feeling it. Integrate, integrate, integrate!

 

Why is it not part of cultivation? Because you do it, addictively, literally all day and night long!

 

Wow! Being a Buddhist sounds like fun! Do mantra yoga with a picture of the guru above the computer, spend all day on the internet forums spinning endless esoteric dependently originated reified philosophical debating, canoodle with girlfriend, drink beer, watch movies, hang out at the bar, watch TV... what a life! Suffering? What suffering? Become a Dzogchener and have fun!

 

Vajrahridaya, man, you are so full of it! How many hours a day are you looking at a computer screen? I keep bringing this up, but you always ignore it: what about a real compassion? What about engaged Buddhism? You're so close to enlightenment you're beyond your fellow beings except to put up your often badly written posts? People are better off reading a book about it than following your confused prose.

 

How about getting of your high internet horse just a little while and doing some volunteer or service work? We know you're already beyond meditating, but what kind of selfish Boddhisattva are you? Enough of your thousands of posts! Tear your face and fingers away from your computer! Even your girlfriend wants you to get off the fucking thing.

 

And before you launch into me with what a dark heart I have, you know nothing about me except that I find your egotistical posturing here as a near-enlightened dude pretty disgusting.And don't tell me, like you have so many others, to "look in the mirror". If you would really look, it isn't as pretty as you obviously fancy yourself.

 

And, if you had any inkling of what I do or what kind of service I have done, it would curl your locks, dude. Even including providing medical care to Tibetan monks and nuns, trained monks as basic medics and helping to establish a medical clinic in the Solukhumbu region of Northern Nepal. Plus a lot more here, and now. I'm not wasting time with all these useless posts with 4-5 people endlessly on this forum (which you came to invade because there's too much competition at e-sangha).Hey, we know what a fine Buddhist you are, even though your whole practice is internet forum "dharma". Quit patting yourself on the back and touting your "enlightenment", get off your ass and do something useful and stop giving Buddhism a bad name!

Edited October 21, 2009 by TheSongsofDistantEarth