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

[Magitek]

Hello,

 

I have been reading some, but not nearly all of Vajrahridayas and this is sparking my interest in Buddhism.

 

While self/Soul/atman appealed to me greatly before, it never made sense how it could be maintained. I actually experienced it extremely briefly once. I was desperate to get back there, made my life a living hell, now that the hunger is waning I'm feeling more space, so to speak. This is why I am interested more in Taoism as it is physical/physiological, not necessarily seeing it as a path, yet something practical.

 

Rinzai (awakened Zen master), is a bit like this:

 

I have no Dharma to give to men. I only cure diseases and undo

knots.

 

These kind of men I like.

 

I don't like the God-men....

 

Here is another interesting part from the Zen Teaching of Rinzai

 

76. The master came to the memorial pagoda of Bodhidharma.

The incumbent asked: "Old Venerable, will your first bow be to

the Buddha or to the Patriarch?"

The master said: "I shall bow neither to the Buddha nor to the

Patriarch."

The incumbent asked: "What feud is there between you, old

Venerable, and the Buddha and Patriarch?"

 

It seems to me the incumbent doesn't get it.

 

Well anyway I have gone on....

 

So I'll ask you bums a traditional question: "what is buddhic enlightenment?" Or, to put another way, what is "enlightenment to buddhists?"

 

Externally, to those who are not enlightened, can it be noticed? Or is it only known amongst the people who are enlightened/realised?

 

Lastly what has kundalini awakening got to do with awakening/realisation from the buddhist view?

 

Also in the topic I said "can it be transmitted". I would have to guess, no it can't. And I would guess again, that kundalini, can be merged with anothers, and so, we could call that transmission.....

 

Lets hear it from you guys then.....

[Lucky7Strikes]

Endless compassion that arises from recognizing the inherent emptiness of all phoenomea. An enlightened being understands the Universe throughly and acts accordingly in order to deliver everyone from suffering.

 

Yet non of these concepts occur to the enlightened being and there is no longer any trace of doubt or dual-perspective. He/she is wu-wei, effortless, and harmonizes everything into this state of blissful union.

 

I don't know how to tell who is enlightened. It might as well be that poor beggar women who passed by and arose great compassion in you. .

Edited August 15, 2009 by Lucky7Strikes

[Sunya]

the goal is wisdom, complete knowing. since wisdom is an aspect of our natural state. the goal is to rest in our natural state which is free of concepts and extremes. compassion is also another aspect of our natural state. so really that's it. but these are all concepts, and our natural state being beyond concepts is impossible to describe.

 

i really suggest the book What makes you not a Buddhist to get a really good handle on what Buddhism is all about

 

http://www.amazon.com/What-Makes-You-Not-B...t/dp/1590304063

 

the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying is also wonderful

 

http://www.amazon.com/Tibetan-Book-Living-...l/dp/0062508342

[Vajrahridaya]

Buddhist enlightenment is defined by the end of psychological suffering. One see's directly the interdepedency and relativity of all things and experiences, and transcends experience all together. One see's the empty nature of all experiences and concepts, thus liberates awareness from identification or limitation of any sort, because you see the cause of awareness itself as endless and not established, you self-liberate in every moment. One transcends the paradox of coming into being and no-being. As in, one see's through any standpoint, any point of view, any permanent state of consciousness. But, because one see's that all experiences and things are always dependent, and never true from their own side, and always caused by another, that's caused by another add infinitum, that as long as the realization of this is continuous, so is also the experience of being liberated from experiencing. The other quality of enlightenment is seeing that since we are connected, that giving this information or wisdom selflessly is also a way to liberate from self clinging.

 

The main difference between Buddhism and other paths is the fact that Buddhism never posits a beginning. A mysterious source to all existence that holds all potentiality as an essence of being that expresses as all. It posits that there is in fact no source and no beginning to things, that each moment in history leads to endless moments in history in a way that realizes infinite regression and thus infinite expansion. There is no rooftop concept, of, "This is the Self", or... "This is the absolute Truth". It see's all of life and experiences from formless to form, from concept to beyond concept as dependently originated without origin, not as a causeless cause, but that... all is merely a chain of causation without a primal cause or a point of origin.

 

Kundalini in most traditions is considered an energy that is inherently intelligent and thus mysterious. But, in Buddhism it's considered merely the realization of mind reflecting light that is merely awareness and that awareness is illuminating infinite internal causation within one's being, thus opening closets of previous causes and effects that form a vast and infinite chain, or matrix of interconnectivity, that is so deep that one can only think of it intuitively in any one moment, merely by recognizing in a way that is beyond thought, but not beyond knowing. This awareness brings to the surface all that is hidden within, and thus the energy of awareness, or illumination acts through one's karmic baggage and by working with the impressions that are now being seen through the path of the Dharma, or virtue of the Buddha's teachings, one de-wires the knots through contemplation and the energy or winds/karmas or the movements start becoming centered into an experience of wholeness and connectivity, and singularity of experience, as one see's that all seeming variables are equally empty, thus of one taste and through the body that experience is represented by the one spine that balances polarities such as left/right, up/down, in/out. If you think of the human body being an emanation of the balancing point of the spine, the hemispheres of the brain, etc. also being metaphors for the universe, the world, East and West hemispheres and polarities, it's endless in explanation. But basically it all balances by seeing the natural interconnectivity of all things and the inherent emptiness of all individual specs of the interconnected all, and one has the experience of non-dual awareness, or rather, awareness of the non-dual and non-abiding nature of all things. It's not an experience that is itself the TRUTH, but rather a realization of the empty nature of things as they always were, are and will be inherently, and thus is a true realization of what all this is.

 

I thought maybe I'd edit for clarity, but maybe the run on sentences will help to bring understanding that is non-linear, reflective of a stream of expression pointing back to the meaning of the experience of holding paradox lighty?

 

It's best described by poetry of the Mahasiddhas I think...

 

Though even the poem below can be misunderstood, as in Buddhism, the term essence is referring to the essential nature of things, that they are relative and thus inherently empty of a real base, and thus, that is the base. So, explanation seems paradoxical and can confuse if not contexualized properly through the original teachings of the Buddha.

 

Nagarjuna's Mahamudra Vision

 

 

Homage to Manjusrikumarabhuta!

 

1. I bow down to the all-powerful Buddha

Whose mind is free of attachment,

Who in his compassion and wisdom

Has taught the inexpressible.

 

2. In truth there is no birth -

Then surely no cessation or liberation;

The Buddha is like the sky

And all beings have that nature.

 

3. Neither Samsara nor Nirvana exist,

But all is a complex continuum

With an intrinsic face of void,

The object of ultimate awareness.

 

4. The nature of all things

Appears like a reflection,

Pure and naturally quiescent,

With a non-dual identity of suchness.

 

5. The common mind imagines a self

Where there is nothing at all,

And it conceives of emotional states -

Happiness, suffering, and equanimity.

 

6. The six states of being in Samsara,

The happiness of heaven,

The suffering of hell,

Are all false creations, figments of mind.

 

7. Likewise the ideas of bad action causing suffering,

Old age, disease and death,

And the idea that virtue leads to happiness,

Are mere ideas, unreal notions.

 

8. Like an artist frightened

By the devil he paints,

The sufferer in Samsara

Is terrified by his own imagination.

 

9. Like a man caught in quicksands

Thrashing and struggling about,

So beings drown

In the mess of their own thoughts.

 

10. Mistaking fantasy for reality

Causes an experience of suffering;

Mind is poisoned by interpretation

Of consciousness of form.

 

11. Dissolving figment and fantasy

With a mind of compassionate insight,

Remain in perfect awareness

In order to help all beings.

 

12. So acquiring conventional virtue

Freed from the web of interpretive thought,

Insurpassable understanding is gained

As Buddha, friend to the world.

 

13. Knowing the relativity of all,

The ultimate truth is always seen;

Dismissing the idea of beginning, middle and end

The flow is seen as Emptiness.

 

14. So all samsara and nirvana is seen as it is -

Empty and insubstantial,

Naked and changeless,

Eternally quiescent and illumined.

 

15. As the figments of a dream

Dissolve upon waking,

So the confusion of Samsara

Fades away in enlightenment.

 

16. Idealising things of no substance

As eternal, substantial and satisfying,

Shrouding them in a fog of desire

The round of existence arises.

 

17. The nature of beings is unborn

Yet commonly beings are conceived to exist;

Both beings and their ideas

Are false beliefs.

 

18. It is nothing but an artifice of mind

This birth into an illusory becoming,

Into a world of good and evil action

With good or bad rebirth to follow.

 

19. When the wheel of mind ceases to turn

All things come to an end.

So there is nothing inherently substantial

And all things are utterly pure.

 

20. This great ocean of samsara,

Full of delusive thought,

Can be crossed in the boat Universal Approach.

Who can reach the other side without it?

 

Colophon

The Twenty Mahayana Verses, (in Sanskrit,

Mahayanavimsaka; in Tibetan: Theg pa chen po nyi

shu pa) were composed by the master Nagarjuna.

They were translated into Tibetan by the Kashmiri

Pandit Ananda and the Bhikshu translator Drakjor

Sherab (Grags 'byor shes rab). They have been

translated into English by the Anagarika

Kunzang Tenzin on the last day of the year 1973

in the hope that the karma of the year may be mitigated.

 

May all beings be happy!

Edited August 16, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

In Vajrayana Kundalini isn't named a single energy, it's more like a blissful experience of the fruit of the 8 fold noble path when one's energies are balanced and one's neurotic inner knots are released through contemplation and the work of meditation. The energy then naturally aligns with the spine or the central channel which is parallel to the spine. So, generally it happens within a context of a smooth transition and not a forced purification, so one doesn't have negative experiences. It's known as chundali I think, which I think means light of the moon. So that's kind of a metaphor as it mostly is awakened through being in the light of the moon, which reflects the light of the sun. The sun being the dharma and the moon being the realized teacher. I suppose one could consider this metaphor in many ways. But it's generally initiated through intermingling with the mind of a master and catching fire through a glimpse of the state of Buddahood, which happens kind of like the idea of osmosis.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[xabir2005]

 

So I'll ask you bums a traditional question: "what is buddhic enlightenment?" Or, to put another way, what is "enlightenment to buddhists?"

 

Externally, to those who are not enlightened, can it be noticed? Or is it only known amongst the people who are enlightened/realised?

A radiance, equanimity, joy, can be noticed in such persons. But unless he tells others about it, I doubt people will suspect that he's "enlightened". It's possible for enlightened beings to remain in society, not talk about it and not being noticed. The Buddha also did warn people not to judge others' enlightenment by his radiance, etc.

 

I think Scotty's definition in Enlightenment, in depth, Is it an experience, or not? Etc. is quite right:

 

Enlightenment is a direct non-conceptual realization that there is no self/doer/thinker/watcher/witness/observer. It is a realization that there is only "phenomena-ing". It does not involve a loss of a self. It's not a state of being unaware of a self. It does not have anything to do with a lessened emotional response to the world, or a loss of negative emotions. It has nothing to do with being able to manifest things into existence, or having magical powers. It is not the ability to accept everything fully. It is not about residing in the space from which everything arises.

 

That said, enlightened beings, who usually have some mastery over shamatha (but not necessarily) usually (but not all) have some abilities at manifesting supernatural activities, and also due to the increased clarity of perception negative emotions are lessened and even if they arise they self-liberate spontaneously on its own accord.

 

Though for an indepth discussion on the different aspects of insights to the Buddhist realization, this one is really detailed: On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection

 

About Kundalini awakening, I am not very familiar with it, but generally it's not the same thing. Kundalini-like experience in Buddhism do manifests at lower stages of insights known as the 'Arising & Passing away event' which got many to mistakenly think themselves as enlightened. I've also heard that Kundalini results in the experience of cosmic consciousness or the I AM experience. However, this is not the sort of enlightenment in Buddhism, see Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Experience on Spiritual Enlightenment

Edited August 16, 2009 by xabir2005

[Magitek]

Vajrahridaya,

 

In light of what you said, U G Krishnamurti sounds very much enlightened from the Buddhist perspective. He is not compassionate in the classic way but would give away his words freely and would talk to anyone who came up to him. I think hes like Rinzai(zen master) who was an awakenend buddhist. Maybe you would call him a Pratyekabuddhas (private buddhas)?

 

The kundalini stuff you talk of sounds very Secret of the Golden Flower (taoist)..... I'll have to read that book again, as it mentions how it compared to some of the buddhist disciplines.

 

Unless meditation is physical, having some kind of mechanism (like in Secret of the Golden Flower), I have a problem with it, in that I do not like to believe in a "mind" or "self" anymore. So the idea of putting energy into some mental form seems a bit ridiculous... What would a buddhist say to that?

 

Well anyway, what of physical discipline in Buddhism? Maybe if you are a monk you can leave the body to whither but as a person in society you need to look after it to function. I heard Bodhidarma would see his monks withering away in meditation and would teach them kung fu.

 

U G Krishnamurti did so much meditation that he would say to people "you never meditated". he happens to think its horrendous, at least the indian systems. Probably the systems he is talking of are the ones that build temendous amounts of energy just for that little glimpse of Self/Atman..... TO have that for extended periods one must go through hell. Like you get those fakirs who torture themselves to build will power, Gurdjieff says thats just the beginning for them, they then need to progress onto monk then on to yogi!!!

[Sunya]

I wouldn't bother with any of the Krishnamurtis, though Jiddu is more approachable. UG doesn't believe in enlightenment, truth, and thinks all paths are useless. why bother with someone so pessimistic? he had some experiences and then just turned into a really negative person. I don't think anything he says is really worth it. His teachings are impractical. though he is higher realization than most people, his teachings are like yelling algebra at a 5 year old

 

I would stick with teachers of more realization who have the compassion to help us practically. get the books I mentioned.. and also check out Crystal and the Way of Light, then you'll be on your way. these books will provide you the foundation to know what the path is all about. once you have a good Buddhist foundation, its easy to tell which teachers are worth it and which aren't.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

Unless meditation is physical, having some kind of mechanism (like in Secret of the Golden Flower), I have a problem with it, in that I do not like to believe in a "mind" or "self" anymore. So the idea of putting energy into some mental form seems a bit ridiculous... What would a buddhist say to that?

 

 

We do practice visualisations, but only in order to change the way we see images and colors. We practice complex forms of visualisation coupled with contemplations merging the images with an inner feeling of seeing all beings as Buddhas, and seeing things as reflections of the state of mind of Buddhahood. It's quite complicated these teachings. One can read many books on this, but one also needs pointing out instructions from a qualified Master who has done silent retreats and has experienced the fruit of such retreat. We never reify as a static self though.

 

Well anyway, what of physical discipline in Buddhism? Maybe if you are a monk you can leave the body to whither but as a person in society you need to look after it to function. I heard Bodhidarma would see his monks withering away in meditation and would teach them kung fu.

 

 

 

This is a very beautiful video on the type of yoga we do as Buddhists, with a short introduction from a master of this particular system who is also my main Rinpoche, there are many systems of Buddhist yoga...

 

Here's another system, this is a more hard core system and this might blow your mind a bit...

 

Here's a Westerner performing some of the same postures that you just saw above...

Some White Boy Trulkor

 

Some Russians performing Tibetan Trained Tummo - Very Secret....

 

Another one that is very beautiful and I highly recommend with interviews of highly realized yogis...

Yogi's of Tibet Part 1 of 8

 

Here's a good video about the Yogi's of Tibet...

[Magitek]

Edited August 16, 2009 by Magitek

[Magitek]

This is a very beautiful video on the type of yoga we do as Buddhists, with a short introduction from a master of this particular system who is also my main Rinpoche, there are many systems of Buddhist yoga...

 

Ah yes, you mentioned the book on it here at Tao Bums. Hows that system working out for you? How has it helped?

 

Here's another system, this is a more hard core system and this might blow your mind a bit...

 

I've seen that clip before. I bet that system kicks ass. Do you know anyone does it? Or met someone who does?

 

Or have you ever tried it?

 

Can a normal man such as myself be granted the privelage of learning it?

 

 

[quote[some Russians performing Tibetan Trained Tummo - Very Secret....

 

Apparently not so secret if its called "yoga for everyone!". Seen that clip before, they say they've deciphered the physiological mechanism for Tummo. But its in Russian so I can't read it. But I wonder if they are actually teaching tummo or just telling you how it works?

[xabir2005]

I wouldn't bother with any of the Krishnamurtis, though Jiddu is more approachable. UG doesn't believe in enlightenment, truth, and thinks all paths are useless. why bother with someone so pessimistic? he had some experiences and then just turned into a really negative person. I don't think anything he says is really worth it. His teachings are impractical. though he is higher realization than most people, his teachings are like yelling algebra at a 5 year old

 

I would stick with teachers of more realization who have the compassion to help us practically. get the books I mentioned.. and also check out Crystal and the Way of Light, then you'll be on your way. these books will provide you the foundation to know what the path is all about. once you have a good Buddhist foundation, its easy to tell which teachers are worth it and which aren't.

Second your observation.

 

Though U.G. has come upon some insights on Anatta/No-Self, it doesn't seem he wants to offer any practical approach for people who is going to get this done. To him it's more like an accident.

 

Unless meditation is physical, having some kind of mechanism (like in Secret of the Golden Flower), I have a problem with it, in that I do not like to believe in a "mind" or "self" anymore. So the idea of putting energy into some mental form seems a bit ridiculous... What would a buddhist say to that?

The techniques and methods in Buddhism are vast and differs from traditions to traditions, there's saying there're 84000 dharma doors in Buddhism, that's not literal but a figurative speech. It could even be more.

 

Visualization is simply one technique... there are methods that do not require 'mental forms' at all. You can simply practice bare attention or mindfulness and observe the three characteristics (impermanence, suffering, no-self)

Well anyway, what of physical discipline in Buddhism? Maybe if you are a monk you can leave the body to whither but as a person in society you need to look after it to function. I heard Bodhidarma would see his monks withering away in meditation and would teach them kung fu.

Keep a routine daily (sitting) meditation practice, and sustain mindfulness throughout the rest of the day. Daily life is part of our practice.

U G Krishnamurti did so much meditation that he would say to people "you never meditated". he happens to think its horrendous, at least the indian systems. Probably the systems he is talking of are the ones that build temendous amounts of energy just for that little glimpse of Self/Atman..... TO have that for extended periods one must go through hell. Like you get those fakirs who torture themselves to build will power, Gurdjieff says thats just the beginning for them, they then need to progress onto monk then on to yogi!!!

In Buddhism the emphasis isn't really on Self or Atman but on Anatta which I guess you probably would have known by now.

 

Meditation in Buddhism is practical not only in sitting but in daily living.

 

Here's an article you may wish to read, on Mindfulness: http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe13.html

Edited August 16, 2009 by xabir2005

[Magitek]

I wrote a big rant on U G but edited it out. His words are out there (mostly free) so whoevers interested can go look them up.

 

I don't like to see him get mixed up with Jiddu Krishnamurti (for instance). Actually I see him as very practical. Probably too practical for some people.

 

I happen to believe he is very legit, if you look at what he did, what happened to him, his life, his words and actions.

 

Anyway I don't want to get into a debate. He is not a guru or teacher never claimed to be. However many were fond of him.

[nac]

Well, if they say they're enlightened, you can usually assume they're not. Sometimes enlightened people chat online, so maybe you'll meet some here.

[xabir2005]

Well, if they say they're enlightened, you can usually assume they're not.

Buddha is the first to proclaim his enlightenment, so you can safely assume he's not?

[nac]

Buddha is the first to proclaim his enlightenment, so you can safely assume he's not?

What I said is usually true. Calculate the statistics: how many people claiming to be enlightened display enlightened activity? And how should I judge how enlightened the historical Buddha was? I've never met him.

[~jK~]

0-0

Edited August 17, 2009 by ~jK~

[Sunya]

Yogis of Tibet, such a good documentary.

[~jK~]

[Sunya]

Edited August 17, 2009 by mikaelz

[Vajrahridaya]

Buddha is the first to proclaim his enlightenment, so you can safely assume he's not?

 

Well, the Buddha actually just said in the local language that he was "Awake". Then people just started calling him the awake one, "Buddha", and that caught on I guess.

 

So, he didn't really say anything about being enlightened in the sense that we usually consider it. He just said that he didn't sleep anymore in the sense that normal people do.

 

Awake I would suppose means 24/7 awareness without a break into any sense of unconsciousness? I'm sure he was being completely humble when he said that he was awake.

[~jK~]

yes, you dont know much about Tibetan Buddhism, but that's ok. you can learn if you want.

no, I don't think that's true. China has no religious freedom, when I was studying at Nanjing university my Buddhist professor told me there aren't even any real centers to practice Buddhism in Nanjing. Her scholarly knowledge of Buddhism is excellent but real teachers are hard to find in China so most only have a cursory awareness of Buddhism that is intellectual not experiential.

 

your bias against Tibetan teachers is a real shame, it's obvious you have no real experience in that subject. I suggest you check out the book 'What Makes You Not a Buddhist' as its the most clear and essential presentation of Buddhism i've ever found, written by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse.

 

I also suggest you stay away from Master Nan, I know he is quite popular in China, but unfortunately doesn't know much about Tibetan Buddhism and holds a clear bias against the tradition.

spoken like a true citizen of China. I lived in China for 6 months, and I think its a real shame how ignorant the Chinese people are to the global political reality that exists outside of the CPC's propoganda.

 

I'm not trying to derail this thread into a Tibet political thing, but a couple of things should be noted to JK

 

the Dalai Lama is considered a great Buddhist Master, if you've never heard his teaching or read his books, thats a real shame. he's also the political leader of a whole people who see him as a Bodhisattva of Compassion. He has no grudge against China, and does not seek Tibetan independence. He wants religious freedom for his people and would NEVER sell Tibet as a military base (are you mad for even suggesting that?)

 

the fact that Tibetans are more comfortable now is of no matter. the issue is with how China invaded Tibet and killed millions of Tibetans, destroyed many temples, statues, and ancient relics. the issue is also with how Tibetans are treated today. The Dalai Lama is the spiritual and political leader of the Tibetan people, and China greatly fears his power so they kidnapped the Panchen Lama and will probably instill their own Communist approved Dalai Lama after the death of the 14th Dalai Lama. China cannot admit to their mistakes in 1949 and will not even talk to the Dalai Lama. there is so much propoganda and bullshit around the topic its so sad. I was in China and I spoke with Political professors and students at Nanjing University, the Harvard of China, and people very cordially told me that he is the devil and their facts were all from the Communist Party, all of which can be refuted easily if you know anything about what happened and whats happening now. Youtube was blocked when I was in China and I'm sure it still is, so people can't see Tibetan monks being beaten by Chinese soldiers.

 

It's a very sad affair. but what happened in 1949 cannot be taken back, and the Dalai Lama and many Tibetan teachers say that whats done is done, and now Buddhism is spreading much more and this would not have happened. So the past is behind us, but China won't let it go. Too afraid to talk to the 'separatist devil' who only wants peace for his people. All the propaganda is sickening.

 

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.

 

I agree - it is off topic.

What I wrote is a reply to the Tibetan videos posted.

When you post propaganda - you got to expect a response.

What happened in 1949 in Tibet simply ended a war that has been ongoing for a thousand years. Read History.

 

I have studied Tibetan buddhism and still do read it at times but like I wrote before - it is too much BS to wade through. Even the videos posted say that it is a secret that can make the practioner crazy - Watch The Videos posted.

 

No Buddhist temples in Nanjing??? This is becoming a bit of a response to a ... fabrication.

I found 92,200 websites relation to nanjing buddhist - including a 1,000 year old temple in Nanjing.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&...mp;aq=f&oq=

 

I've been in China for over 12 years and have travelled - by bus, train and plane throughout China's southern borders from Hong Kong to Vietnam & Burma & Nepal, eastern shores from Hong Kong to Beijing and quite a bit of territory in between.

I speak & write the language as well as have 2 students that I worked with, one with a Masters in Chinese History, another with a BS in Asian languages.

 

Watch or read China TV in English or Chinese : http://english.cctv.com/01/index.shtml

 

Hong Kong Public TV - schedule only http://schedule.tvb.com/pearl/

and

http://www.hkatv.com/v3/schedule/schedule-world.html

Edited August 17, 2009 by ~jK~

[Sunya]

I agree - it is off topic.

What I wrote is a reply to the Tibetan videos posted.

When you post propaganda - you got to expect a response.

What happened in 1949 in Tibet simply ended a war that has been ongoing for a thousand years. Read History

 

I do not post propaganda. and old grudges don't justify religious and cultural oppression.

 

I have studied Tibetan buddhism and still do read it at times but like I wrote before - it is too much BS to wade through. Even the videos posted say that it is a secret that can make the practioner crazy - Watch The Videos posted.

 

theres no BS, you just need to find a teacher. and the practices are secretive only because they are very powerful and have to be handled properly and given to the right person. just like you can't give a gun to a child until you teach him how to use it properly.

 

No Buddhist temples in Nanjing??? This is becoming a bit of a response to a ... fabrication.

I found 92,200 websites relation to nanjing buddhist - including a 1,000 year old temple in Nanjing.

 

Buddhist temple does not mean a center where you can receive real teachings. Buddhist temples in China, many of which I've visited, are places where you go and light incense infront of a statue. Its a joke. i've seen "monks" there on cell phones. Buddhist temples in china are just tourist traps to make China look cultural.

 

 

I've been in China for over 12 years and have travelled - by bus, train and plane throughout China's southern borders from Hong Kong to Vietnam & Burma & Nepal, eastern shores from Hong Kong to Beijing and quite a bit of territory in between.

I speak & write the language as well as have 2 students that I worked with, one with a Masters in Chinese History, another with a BS in Asian languages.

 

wonderful credentials, unfortunately that doesn't mean much if you're not inquisitive.

Edited August 17, 2009 by mikaelz

[Vajrahridaya]

 

I have studied Tibetan buddhism and still do read it at times but like I wrote before - it is too much BS to wade through. Even the videos posted say that it is a secret that can make the practioner crazy - Watch The Videos posted.

 

 

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.

[xabir2005]

Well, the Buddha actually just said in the local language that he was "Awake". Then people just started calling him the awake one, "Buddha", and that caught on I guess.

 

So, he didn't really say anything about being enlightened in the sense that we usually consider it. He just said that he didn't sleep anymore in the sense that normal people do.

 

Awake I would suppose means 24/7 awareness without a break into any sense of unconsciousness? I'm sure he was being completely humble when he said that he was awake.

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, having known the nature of reality to the very end, 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.

Edited August 17, 2009 by xabir2005