What is Buddhic enlightenment? Can it be transmitted or verified externally? Also, how is it different from kundalini awakening?

[Vajrahridaya]

In Buddha's time there never was an equivalent word to the western sense of 'enlightenment'.

 

'Awake' is the word and probably an even better one, and it is the word the Buddha used to describe himself. Self awakened, liberated from sufferings, in other words having reached the goal. So was the attainment of many of those disciples well known in his days. There was an open culture where one's attainments is generally known, so one knows who to find if one wants to seek awakening.

 

Ah... a very good place and time to be alive! Wow...

[Sunya]

Get it or not... that doesn't matter, there will be plenty that do. Those that do are those that really understand Mahayana to a deeply experiential degree. Even some Theravadin Masters can read Dzogchen and go... oh yeah.. I get it! Because it's not different in essence from the Theravada, it's just explained from the perspective of the experience of what is taught in the different yana's. It's always coming from the perspective of the fruit of the practice, instead of the practice itself. We take up the goal of the practice as the practice.

 

yes indeed. I agree

 

I just want to stress that the different schools of Buddhism are all there for you to study, if you're interested in Buddhism check them out, visit centers, meet teachers, read books. Find the one that is most compatible with your personality, the one that appeals to you, and most importantly find a teacher that you connect with. All schools of Buddhism say its imperative to have an enlightened teacher guide you. Having that is so much more important than worrying about which school is best, since 'best' is a subjective not an objective observation.

[xabir2005]

Which city do you live in now?

 

Do you know a lay master called Yuan Yin Lao Ren?

[Vajrahridaya]

All schools of Buddhism say its imperative to have an enlightened teacher guide you. Having that is so much more important than worrying about which school is best, since 'best' is a subjective not an objective observation.

 

Whatever evolves you is the best...

[~jK~]

Vajrayana is more like Taoism than Chinese forms of Buddhism. Taoism is also secretive about their practices and only give practices to students who are ready to move on up.

 

There was no real war before the Chinese invasion only talks. The Tibetans hadn't really been at war for over a 1000 years. Though there have always been skirmishes.

 

Also, if you look at Shaivite Tantra, it's the same way... secretive... Because you have to have understanding as well as experiential readiness before you can take on certain practices... otherwise you will just not understand and yes... possibly go crazy.

 

You have to learn how to swim in the shallow end before you swim in the deep end, and then you have to master that before you swim in the ocean... right?

 

Otherwise you'll just drown. Just because you don't understand Vajrayana doesn't mean others do not. Don't limit us by your limitations.

 

Vajrayana is Tantra. In China... your mostly learning Mahayana Buddhism, not Vajrayana. Mahayana is easier to just learn, as it's largely just sutra and meditation.

 

Tantra is different, not to mention Dzogchen which will make you even crazier if your not ready for it.

 

Get it or not... that doesn't matter, there will be plenty that do. Those that do are those that really understand Mahayana to a deeply experiential degree. Even some Theravadin Masters can read Dzogchen and go... oh yeah.. I get it! Because it's not different in essence from the Theravada, it's just explained from the perspective of the experience of what is taught in the different yana's. It's always coming from the perspective of the fruit of the practice, instead of the practice itself. We take up the goal of the practice as the practice.

 

 

Have you ever heard of Zen Buddhism? Maybe not.

Zen is the Japanese word misspelled as Chan for Chinese.

You have seen my writing here- - -See my mind see me.

I am familiar with Buddhist/Taoist teachings as well as practice.

Some here have reached a level of understanding - but not many.

Buddhism is based in Meditation, which is the basis for enlightenment.

Definitions are for dictionaries. Understandings are inductive experiences.

Essentially - If you learn to Meditate - all else will follow.

Understanding is an inductive process.

Meditate - all else will follow

all else will follow

Meditate

~..~

 

A little poem I wrote some years ago on meditation:

 

The 4th Mirror

.

 

Close your eyes and what do you have?

 

No tv, no outside, & no emotional mountains.

 

Only what you know, reason, imagine & your true self.

 

.

 

Guilt, fears, & uncertainties become Ghosts waiting defeat.

 

Actions, past & future, self & others, fall into nature's microscope.

 

The world becomes a large vacant room, wanting to be filled.

 

.

 

Breath becomes a furnace for life-giving energy.

 

Time becomes a crucible for finding purity.

 

Awareness becomes a peak for a seat.

 

.

 

Sight returns new and clear.

 

Eyes looking inward,

 

Seeing outward.

 

.

 

Find Time's

 

Eternal

 

Self

 

.

Edited August 17, 2009 by ~jK~

[Gerard]

Talking about it is not going to help at all. Listening to others' experiences during meditation is not going to help and worst of all it is going to condition your mind.

 

Keep practicing and visit this forum less often.

 

 

Edited: typo.

Edited August 17, 2009 by durkhrod chogori

[~jK~]

Which city do you live in now?

 

Do you know a lay master called Yuan Yin Lao Ren?

KowloonTong

I tend to avoid the Yuan family due to triad connections.

[Vajrahridaya]

Have you ever heard of Zen Buddhism? Maybe not.

 

I have and have studied some. I rather enjoy some of the texts from Zen.

Zen is the Japanese word misspelled as Chan for Chinese.

Yes indeed. It actually comes from Dhyan and then becomes Chan in Chinese, then Zen in Japanese, so it goes from India to China, then to Japan. Dhyan means meditation.

You have seen my writing here- - -See my mind see me.

Yes a bit.

I am familiar with Buddhist/Taoist teachings as well as practice.

Good!

Some here have reached a level of understanding - but not many.

Sure, as in everywhere...

Buddhism is based in Meditation, which is the basis for enlightenment.

Actually it's based on meditation and insight... Jhana and Vipassana.

As far as I can tell most other traditions are based on only Jhana as Vipassana means basically applied insight of dependent origination and Jhana is just absorption and most paths use contemplation of the experiences of absorption without dependent origination as it is elaborated by the Buddha.

Definitions are for dictionaries. Understandings are inductive experiences.

Or definitions can be explanations of the meaning of experiences through word form.

Essentially - If you learn to Meditate - all else will follow.

The Buddha was quite adamant that meditation alone wouldn't do it, that insight or "right view" was needed before meditation even, otherwise one might get over excited about a meditative experience and think it an experience of ultimate reality. This is why Vipassana is very important.

Understanding is an inductive process.

It's a process for sure...

A little poem I wrote some years ago on meditation:

The 4th Mirror

.

 

Close your eyes and what do you have?

 

No tv, no outside, & no emotional mountains.

 

Only what you know, reason, imagine & your true self.

 

.

 

Guilt, fears, & uncertainties become Ghosts waiting defeat.

 

Actions, past & future, self & others, fall into nature's microscope.

 

The world becomes a large vacant room, wanting to be filled.

 

.

 

Breath becomes a furnace for life-giving energy.

 

Time becomes a crucible for finding purity.

 

Awareness becomes a peak for a seat.

 

.

 

Sight returns new and clear.

 

Eyes looking inward,

 

Seeing outward.

 

.

 

Find Time's

 

Eternal

 

Self

 

.

Well... this is interesting...

 

But, see, without Vipassana, one gets too excited about the meditative experience and starts thinking that it's the real Self of all.

 

This would not hold under Buddhist scrutiny.

 

But, keep meditating, why not? Feels nice... eh?

 

I like the intention of the whole poem though, that realization of the nature of mind is possible through meditation. It's just I don't know exactly what you mean by Self though...? That's a tricky word. I'm not sure about your interpretive conclusions?

Edited August 17, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Sunya]

Edited August 17, 2009 by mikaelz

[Vajrahridaya]

Edited August 17, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[~jK~]

Edited August 17, 2009 by ~jK~

[~jK~]

A Taoist Temple in Hong Kong

http://www.discoverhongkong.com/eng/attrac...-institute.html

[Sunya]

JK your replies aren't very useful.

 

is English not your first language? I think there is miscommunication here... your response about Chan didn't address anything I said. I was saying that Buddhism isn't just about meditation and used Chan as an example, and you respond with a lesson on Chinese language, and tell me about Buddhists nuns stopping their period and how Chan is Chinese. ????... then you post a link to a Taoist temple in Hong Kong.

 

I get the feeling we're on different planets.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

for those that don't mind reading small text on a screen (you can always copy the text to Word and change font, and print it out) here's a very good site that covers a lot

 

http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~dsantina/tree/

Edited August 17, 2009 by mikaelz

[~jK~]

Edited August 19, 2009 by ~jK~

[Wayfarer64]

Ah... a very good place and time to be alive! Wow...

 

 

All times are great to be alive- romantisizing any one of them -serves what purpose?

[~jK~]

All times are great to be alive- romantisizing any one of them -serves what purpose?

 

Romanticizing any one of them, romanticizes all of them, with emphasis on the present.

Living in the Now is a key.

Edited August 19, 2009 by ~jK~

[Vajrahridaya]

All times are great to be alive- romantisizing any one of them -serves what purpose?

 

All times are available for liberation now that the Buddha has spoken the Sananta Dharma since 650 B.C. Before that there were solitary realizers, but after that, millions of realizers and in groups.

 

The Buddha, the great muni, gave us all a blessing. Now, I can experience the potential that he realized through my own mind and my own realization of the nature of this moment.

[~jK~]

All times are available for liberation now that the Buddha has spoken the Sananta Dharma since 650 B.C. Before that there were solitary realizers, but after that, millions of realizers and in groups.

 

The Buddha, the great muni, gave us all a blessing. Now, I can experience the potential that he realized through my own mind and my own realization of the nature of this moment.

 

I've been shifting from using the words of Buddhas, Lao Tze's etc as a way to grow - to using their words as a way to not do or to do things. Example being to erase my currently accumilated karma through Buddhist phillosophy as in http://www.amtbweb.org/tchquote.php

 

And from that point to use my newly refurbished mind to explore the techniques of meditation.

 

So much has been written about the great masters that the practice seems to have become secondary to their words...

 

Reversal is the Way of the Tao

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

The old Tibet/China argument

 

Hong Kong is very different from the mainland. Nanjing during the cultural revolution was the place that least suffered the destruction of it's architecture, hence many remaining temples. As for if what is taught there is useful who knows, but I suspect not so much as before, just like the majority of Wu Shu in the mainland compared to the real stuff in Hong Kong.

 

As for Tibet, Chinese history teaches one way, western another. But as one Chinese student pointed out to me 'you weren't there and neither was I, so how can we really know who is telling the truth or what is the true fact of the history?'. It was a very good point. And if you say there were eyewitness accounts of brutality a Chinese person would simply say that was western propaganda.

 

Honestly, I gave up bothering about it, perhaps that's what they wanted. But you can't prove what you can't prove.

[markern]

The old Tibet/China argument

 

Hong Kong is very different from the mainland. Nanjing during the cultural revolution was the place that least suffered the destruction of it's architecture, hence many remaining temples. As for if what is taught there is useful who knows, but I suspect not so much as before, just like the majority of Wu Shu in the mainland compared to the real stuff in Hong Kong.

 

As for Tibet, Chinese history teaches one way, western another. But as one Chinese student pointed out to me 'you weren't there and neither was I, so how can we really know who is telling the truth or what is the true fact of the history?'. It was a very good point. And if you say there were eyewitness accounts of brutality a Chinese person would simply say that was western propaganda.

 

Honestly, I gave up bothering about it, perhaps that's what they wanted. But you can't prove what you can't prove.

 

With the standard of (dis)information people in china are used to it might not be suprising that he says that but we have a lot better information available and chineese brutality in Tibet is not difficult to verify.

[gendao]

JK, this is all off topic. if you would like to discuss this further you can start a new topic and I will participate there.

There's already been several threads discussing the politics of Tibet, feel free to grave dig them up :

 

Tibet & Darfur Vs Gaza & Congo double standard

Does the US want to free or use Tibet?

Tibet = strategic location for a US military base?

 

The main problem I have with Western criticism of China is gross hyperbolization and ridonkulous double-standards*. Also, the unflinching focus only on negative aspects of China, whilst ignoring all the good progress, comes down to straight playa-hating. This ugly attitude was most glaringly visible during CBS's coverage of the recent Beijing Olympics.

 

*

- Why is China known in the US primarily for human rights abuses, when those in Africa and Israel are faaarrrrrr worse?

But Africa is coddled with sympathy and showered with celebrity pleas for charity here, totalling trillions over the last 50 years...

And Israel is repeatedly promoted as our "great friend and ally?"

- Why was China so harshly condemned in the recent Tibetan riots (where only a handful on both sides died), but when Israel killed 1000 in Gaza living under their racial apartheid, not much was said?

- Why was racial apartheid in South Africa condemned, but supported in Israel?

- Why is Chinese colonialism in Tibet condemned, but far more brutal Israeli colonialism in Palestine supported?

- Why hasn't the US been condemned for human rights abuses for killing a million Iraqis since 2003?

- Why hasn't African-on-African violence racking up a 5 million body count in the Congo alone been condemned, while Darfur was widely-publicized with just a few hundred thousand deaths by comparison (and mostly due to climate change) harshly scapegoated on African Muslims and Chinese?

 

You all seeing the real underlying political agenda here, yet? How the US's "humanitarian concerns" are really just propaganda smokescreens for the global chess match that they're really playing?