A question for Vaj the Buddhist

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

ok ok....firstly sorry to all for directing this question to Vaj, I didn't mean to leave anybody out at all, it was simply that he is, perhaps, the most outspoken and prominent Buddhist on this forum.....but I do know he's not the only one. So feel free anyone to post whatever you want to say.

 

It's amazing how much you guys can post whilst I've been sleeping! It's gonna take me some time to read through all the pages and since we're already at 4 pages I don't think I will be able to respond to everyone....so apologies in advance.

[C T]

Enlightenment isn't some big mystery. Of course enlightened masters know. If you don't know that you're awake, then you're not awake... very simple.

 

Naturally one would know. But normally those that do do not advertise or make a big fuss about it. They let their deep insights do the talking. Did you know that duck eggs are as nutritious, if not more so, than chicken eggs? Have you ever pondered why chicken eggs outsell duck eggs? Thats because chickens make a big fuss after eggs have been laid, whereas ducks simply give their bootys little, unnoticeable shakes after doing so, and just walks off, and carry on with business. No big deal. Thats why chickens get more attention - they create the causes for people to notice them. In the spiritual 'farm', as in life, the same principle is always at work.

 

 

Wisdom and awareness arise together and can be likened to be the same. There is a lot of unawareness in this world.... Many dim lights. They all have the potential for vast wisdom, but there is a huge difference between actualized potential and dormant potential.

It is so, as you say.

 

 

If you believe that all paths are the same, then you must believe that enlightenment occurs without any conditions. In that case, you might as well sit on your couch and watch movies all day. Don't even think about enlightenment, forget about it. Don't make any effort to change your habits and transform yourself into a more loving open confident and connected being. Just don't. There is no path! I really don't get how people can believe this and yet practice... Practice is essential! You gotta DO!

 

There are many who are unsure of their convictions, hence the normal thing to say is all paths lead to same destination. In fairness, its not that there is a 'no path' declaration made by anyone. What differentiates the Buddhist path in this age from others is that ultimately there is no destination, no arrival. People generally become anxious about this, which is a normal reaction. As long as samsara exists, duality will perpetuate, and the teachings that show the means and point the way to end mental afflictions will arise. Again, in this age it seems that the Buddhist teachings can offer the most efficacious means towards liberation from the kleshas (mental angst) - who knows, maybe in the distant future, names will change, but evolution will ensure that the teachings will always continue.

 

Yes, practice is essential. The right ones. Keep to the basics, and resist the temptation to desire quick results. Once the causes for happiness and freedom are understood, the often stressful need to generate and focus on the results diminishes. This leads to other virtues. (Read the discourse posted on page 1).

 

Now I think the issue is that people think that Buddhist enlightenment is simply dissolving the self and having nondual experence. If that was it then yes Buddhism is just another method, but that's NOT the goal. Nonduality is only halfway there. Other mystical traditions stop at 'dissolving the self' but Buddhists (should) keep going. Enlightenment is when there is realization that there is nothing BUT the interplay of phenomena which all lack 'self-ness'. There is no separation (since everything is interdependent) but I am NOT you. There is a big difference between saying You and I are the same, and saying you and I are interdependent and lack self, but still exist relatively.

Good point Mikael.

 

Enlightenment is not a state of consciousness, because all states arise interdependently and don't last. You can't focus your mind for 30 minutes to become enlightened and then fall back again. That's just an impermanent state which arose dependent on you concentrating. Enlightenment is realization, an insight, which does occur dependently but lasts permanently and encompasses all states of consciousness. It is the realization that all states of mind, all phenomena experienced by mind, and mind itself are all interdependent arisings.Not two, not one.

 

Enlightenment - maybe an ability to let go when its time to let go - let go of what one may ask? Of clinging to views that may be wrong or outdated. Insights are tools for transformation. Once they have been utilized to reach the shores of enlightenment, they will need to be discarded, or else 'lightness' becomes 'heaviness'. Even Buddhist teachings are only relatively precious. These too one has to know when to let them go, with a grateful heart, that is. Offer them to those who also want to taste freedom. Sometimes true compassion means letting it go, and passing the wisdom to others. Some will be grateful, others will sometimes spit at the giver. In this patience and equanimity is learnt. Thru patience, nothing is unattainable.

 

The language used by mystics allows you to get a peak into their realizations. Once you understand the 'map' then you can clearly see who is where. This sort of hierarchal view bothers some people. Maybe because they really want to believe that we're all on an Escalator to Heaven. In my experience, debating with people like Vajra, who is a very experienced practitioner, brought up fear and anxiety about my own path. It really made me question whether I truly understood the path and goal. It tore my life apart for a couple years, but was well worth it. Not many people allow themselves to be torn up like that. I found it be very positive, eventually

 

People allow themselves to be bothered. This is due to incorrect understanding. The escalator analogy is nice. There is no escalator, as you say. A ferris wheel perhaps, but no escalator..

 

Vaj has insights. Deep ones. People do not feel he is skillful in the way he presents them. They feel like its being rammed down somewhere, and this creates discomfort. Its natural. Something to work with perhaps.

 

Thanks!

Edited June 24, 2010 by CowTao

[Starjumper]

Thanks for sharing DC. First hand experience with the tools available is always good.

 

And these tools are so direct, simple, logical and timeless. Just by putting them to good use in the beginning, as in to have an open willingness to try them out, is already good. After using them for a while, their efficacy brings about assurance based on first-hand experience, so that those that work are kept, and those that do not are put aside, hence the path becomes good in the middle - results are seen, and finally, upon attaining stability and arousing the conviction that they are indeed logically practicable, they can be shared with others out of selflessness, so even the ending is fabulous. Cant beat that!

Bullshit!

 

Buddhism does NOT have a patent on enlightenment, what they have a patent on is being so anal about it and focussing on it ad-nauseum and so they think they have the patent. The notion that Buddhist enlightenment is superior is foolishness, and just for them to say 'Buddhist' enlightenment as if it is somehow different means they aren't talking about true enlightenment and don't know what it means. There's so much dogma around it that they are quite confused, but it doesn't stop their soaring egos to keep mentioning how they have it all buttoned up, does it.

 

There are plenty of Taoist sects and practices that lead to enlightenment, and quickly too, they just don't go around shouting others down about it. On the other hand, the Buddhist sects that go around in the streets with loudspeakers proclaiming their advanced practices for achieving enlightenment are the least likely to provide it, and many of their so called enlightened are really just doing a little song and dance performance.

 

Let me try to explain that last sentence, I think few will get it.

 

There is a thing called an enlightenment experience which is the real wowwie zowwie thing and is the same for everyone everywhere, for those few who get it. It ignites an alchemical change in an individual but it's back to reality and duality for you pal, after your experience. From there an individual must do much cultivating to take advantage of and make sense of their experience.

 

What happens is that many Buddhist, after they have their experience, think they are all that and start putting on a big act due to their dogma and preconditioning. so the enlightenment experience is what is real and it can last for a day or two, to say someone is enlightened (not the experience) is really a relative definition of their state and how close they can get to returning to the fullness of the original experience, if they even had that. You can be sure that many of them are putting on the act without even having the experience.

 

So the Taoists (and the Hindus), who are much more grounded in reality, will tell you that the enlightenment experience is a stepping stone along the way, but due to their dogma the Buddhists think they've finally ARRIVED and they're all that.

 

If some of the Buddhists here had the experience they might sing a different song.

 

The way they speak of enlightenment is the same way Christians speak of being 'saved' it's just a bunch of religious evangelism, and you can bet your life that the fundamentalist Buddhists will not be able to accept this.

 

Here's another way to look at it, Taoism and Hinduism are true shamanic, indigenous, prehistoric, and inclusive systems. They are inclusive and have no axe to grind. BUT all religions that come out of others, as Buddhism came out of Hinduism, define themselves by what they are against and how they are better.

 

This is easy to see in the West, where Catholicism came out of Judaism, and Islam and the other Christian protestant religions came out of Catholicism. They are each defined about what they are against in their progenitors and why they are better, even though they are all the same. It's a bunch of backstabbing engendered by a bunch of power hungry priests. Buddhism is the same.

 

Know the evangelists, invading a Taoist forum, for what they are, and have pity; but wouldn't it be nice if they shut their yaps about it?

Edited June 24, 2010 by Starjumper7

[C T]

Bullshit!

 

Buddhism does NOT have a patent on enlightenment, what they have a patent on is being so anal about it and focussing on it ad-nauseum and so they think they have the patent. The notion that Buddhist enlightenment is superior is foolishness, and just for them to say 'Buddhist' enlightenment as if it is somehow different means they aren't talking about true enlightenment and don't know what it means. There's so much dogma around it that they are quite confused, but it doesn't stop their soaring egos to keep mentioning how they have it all buttoned up, does it.

 

There are plenty of Taoist sects and practices that lead to enlightenment, and quickly too, they just don't go around shouting others down about it. On the other hand, the Buddhist sects that go around in the streets with loudspeakers proclaiming their advanced practices for achieving enlightenment are the least likely to provide it, and many of their so called enlightened are really just doing a little song and dance performance.

 

Let me try to explain that last sentence, I think few will get it.

 

There is a thing called an enlightenment experience which is the real wowwie zowwie thing and is the same for everyone everywhere, for those few who get it. It ignites an alchemical change in an individual but it's back to reality and duality for you pal, after your experience. From there an individual must do much cultivating to take advantage of and make sense of their experience.

 

What happens is that many Buddhist, after they have their experience, think they are all that and start putting on a big act due to their dogma and preconditioning. so the enlightenment experience is what is real and it can last for a day or two, to say someone is enlightened (not the experience) is really a relative definition of their state and how close they can get to returning to the fullness of the original experience, if they even had that. You can be sure that many of them are putting on the act without even having the experience.

 

So the Taoists (and the Hindus), who are much more grounded in reality, will tell you that the enlightenment experience is a stepping stone along the way, but due to their dogma the Buddhists think they've finally ARRIVED and they're all that.

 

If some of the Buddhists here had the experience they might sing a different song.

 

The way they speak of enlightenment is the same way Christians speak of being 'saved' it's just a bunch of religious evangelism, and you can bet your life that the fundamentalist Buddhists will not be able to accept this.

 

Here's another way to look at it, Taoism and Hinduism are true shamanic, indigenous, prehistoric, and inclusive systems. They are inclusive and have no axe to grind. BUT all religions that come out of others, as Buddhism came out of Hinduism, define themselves by what they are against and how they are better.

 

This is easy to see in the West, where Catholicism came out of Judaism, and Islam and the other Christian protestant religions came out of Catholicism. They are each defined about what they are against in their progenitors and why they are better, even though they are all the same. It's a bunch of backstabbing engendered by a bunch of power hungry priests. Buddhism is the same.

 

Know the evangelists, invading a Taoist forum, for what they are, and have pity; but wouldn't it be nice if they shut their yaps about it?

Without being brash, can you please point out the exact formulas offered by these other traditions? I would love to learn of them and put them to use. I am open to anything that works, logically and conclusively, step by step.

 

The methods are primary. Not who has the exclusive rights, or how they came about. I can learn history from books or online. What interests me is what you practice that you think exceeds those offered in the buddhist teachings? If we can compare notes on this, i am sure i can come away with some benefit, since I am not stuck on dogma. The question is - can you?

 

At the core of the buddhist method that leads to freeing the self from mental afflictions lie the truth that when virtues are cultivated, one gets virtuous results. Kick the sandbag, and both the sandbag and the kicker moves, not only the sandbag. Kick the wall, and we injure the foot. Things like that. Very simple logic. This is not buddhist logic. Its commonsense, mostly. I am sure many other traditions share similar logic coupled with practical applications. In the Buddhist teachings these are all laid out very clearly and even those with minimal intelligence can apply them to gain peace and happiness, and freedom from being unclear about how to proceed further on the spiritual path. There is not much requirement in it for the trial-and-error approach.

 

So if you can share your insights on what you found to be more effective than those offered in the buddhist teachings, you are welcome to share them here. I for one would be very grateful.

Edited June 24, 2010 by CowTao

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

So far, in view of page one responses(and I'm really not gonna be able to respond to all, so I'm hoping you all won't mind). In the hope of saving a bit of space and not creating a whole page of quotes I will just edit them down a bit. But I have read them all...so thank you

 

 

The joyful need not decide 'may i be filled with rapture'. Joyfulness naturally produces rapture.

 

 

The benefit and the blessing of a clear conscience is joy.

 

As an example, people often declare, "I just want to be filled with joy all the time!" By understanding the deep meaning of this Sutta, there is no need actually to form a conscious intention to be joyful

 

Thanks Cowtao. Here is my problem.... in the very few Buddhist texts I have read and from reading Buddhists posts here I get the impression the bliss/joy part is simply a way stage along the way, and not the final 'result'.

 

Am I wrong in that thinking? I might well be.

 

 

Ok, I'll take a stab;-)

 

Enlightenment is knowing experientially a few things at the same time:

 

- how one aspect of what you (initially) consider to be yourself (the ego/identity construct)came about

 

- knowing that it isn't all of you at the same time.

 

- it's recognition of how consciousness....

 

Thanks Kate, I actually can really understand your answer and it makes a lot of sense to me. I'm fairly sure(as sure as I can be in any case)that your answer makes up a great deal of the enlightenment process(?).

 

 

 

 

After you get many replies, some better than others, you may want to ask yourself, why am I asking? What is it you are looking for or what are you trying to accomplish with these studies? The answers to those questions will tell you more than any reply here.

 

 

 

Well Art.... I can only say if I knew what I was looking for I wouldn't be asking ..because then I would know the answer fully. But I can see you have a deeper meaning to your question. I can only say that if enlightenment, in whatever form, exists, it must be the one true 'goal' in life....although I shouldn't say that, and perhaps goals 'per se' are rather missing the point of living and experiencing.

 

 

let me make my guess : ))

 

- en-light-en-ment = it must have something to do with Light, a certain kinda light

 

- if the English counterpart isn't functional, what is the original buddhist word?

 

I think we must understand the Etymologyfirst...

 

Good point Little1, for sure.

 

(I just got this while trying to quote: 'You have posted more than the allowed number of quoted blocks of text'. Oh dear, I'm gonna have to break it down.

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

There was a good thread in 2007 on definitions of enlightenment and a poster called agharta gave what is generally considered to be the corrrect answer :

 

 

 

So now you know.

 

ROFL

 

I think Agharta might be onto something there Cat. That seriously made me laugh. If it's true, I hate to think of the prices of real estate in Genie land! Overpopulation would have become a problem thousands of years ago!

 

 

The problem with defining what enlightenment is (is-ness) through a semantic framework creates problems of interpretation. Apologists for their particular belief system (BS) use the old Aristotelian framework of a black or white, yes or no framework to defend and promote a belief system. Herein lies the problem. By using this framework, the purveyor, dogmatist etc. of so called truth, will posit his or her view as absolute truth i.e, not arbitrary. This black and white framework does not leave room for any continuum of experience, discussion or interpretation, but leaves one with only two choices.

 

Here is a well written piece on is-ness. http://www.transpersonal.com.au/about/is-ness.htm

 

ralis

 

That is also something I consider to be true Ralis, the use of a framework creates an actual problem. As far as my understanding of enlightenment goes(and it is limited to say the least)it should be beyond a framework.

 

'This black and white framework does not leave room for any continuum of experience, discussion or interpretation, but leaves one with only two choices.'(Ralis)

 

 

Ok 'Vajrahridaya'(cut and paste is such a joy), firstly thanks for answering all the questions.....

 

 

Yes, first my Hindu teacher is enlightened within her tradition which I grew up in. But, she has a knowledge obscuration according to Buddhism in the way she relates to the experience, there is a slight mis-cognition which leads to an entirely different end game sort of speak, which in Buddhism... there is no end-game.

 

 

Is this a Buddhist interpretation of 'mis-cognition'? What is the Buddhist 'end game' you speak of(although I do understand there isn't exactly one)? What was her mis-cognition and why was it incorrect(?).

 

 

My Buddhist enlightened teacher has IMO a more integrated bliss and a deeper awareness of things. Thus the transmission from him was subtler and I experienced more clarity.

 

 

Can you define 'clarity' for me please. How to judge clarity? Is this connected to 'mis-cognition'?

 

 

Yes, state of mind that isn't ordinary. Yes... there is transmission.

 

 

Very clear and direct answer. Thank you. Understood.

 

 

 

There are ways of deciphering that have been documented. But in all due respect, you can't fully know anything for certain unless you are constantly in the state of Rigpa. Link to explanation of Rigpa.

 

But, if you get a glimpse of Rigpa through the persons transmission, then you know you are in good hands. My Hindu teacher gave me transmission and there is non-dual awareness there but it's of a slightly different handling which somewhat changes the experience, due to how it's interpreted on a deeply subtle level.

 

 

Ok, there are rather a lot of external links on the first page which is great(thanks all for the links), I'm gonna have to take a good look at all of them, so I can't comment at this time.

 

 

 

You live, but you are clear about where you came from, past lives, and clear about what you are living for, so you are clear about where you are going, even if the particulars will still manifest spontaneously. There is intrinsic clarity due to direct seeing through to the nature of all activities and not static states of contraction or resistance to any occurrence in life anymore.

 

 

How can I be sure, absolutely sure, the above is not a mis-cognition? Why would living daily in life, happily, not be a form of enlightenment? What use is the above if ignorance of such could, possibly, be just as stimulating(without the comparison of enlightenment I could remain blissfully unaware of how unhappy I maybe actually am).

 

 

The above questions are not to say you are wrong, I understand part of your path is 'debate' so I'm hoping not only can you teach me something but you can also get something from it, I hope so anyway.

 

Edit: I gotta go for a tea break!

Edited June 24, 2010 by Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that

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

 

The male practitioner is given a female consort and through certain sexual rites, the 5 meats are collected and consumed. One must consume these meats without any discriminating taste or judgment of any kind. If one is able to transcend judgment, then one is considered enlightened.

 

The meats are: Urine, feces, human flesh, sperm and menstrual blood.

 

 

 

I think I've done at least two of those by accident. I wasn't able to transcend my judgement though!

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

 

Bullshit!

 

 

Know the evangelists, invading a Taoist forum, for what they are, and have pity; but wouldn't it be nice if they shut their yaps about it?

 

 

Uncalled for Starjumper7. And, no, I asked a question on this thread to a Buddhist, so no, it wouldn't, in this case at least be nice if they shut their yaps about it.

 

The content within your two above quotes was interesting though. If there is a Daoist form of enlightenment then what is it? What is the Chinese word for this...I'm only asking so I can find out myself if this term can be translated to enlightenment in English. I'm kind of guessing the Daoist enlightenment may not be considered as Buddhist enlightenment. Therefore, I'm not sure it should be translated in to the English word enlightenment. I think this might go back to Little1's etymology point.

 

Not sure.

[xabir2005]

4. What is the actual experience of enlightenment(if it is a certain specific stage kind of thing)in simple terms?

Do go through these articles...

 

* 1) Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment

* 2) On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection

* 3) Realization and Experience and Non-Dual Experience from Different Perspectives

[Gerard]

Bullshit!

 

Buddhism does NOT have a patent on enlightenment...

 

 

Well, first of all. You are in a spiritual forum and as such learning how to respect others is a must. If you can't then look into yourself and see what changes can be done.

 

No one said the Buddhist model holds a patent as you said. The call it Buddhist because their practitioners follow the path opened by someone who almost died seeking spiritual enlightenment unlike some who easily criticise something without having walked 0.05% of the path others like Gautama Buddha did. And by walking the path I mean renunciation of society's comfort, hard work, undergoing austerities and MATERIAL POVERTY and un unbelievable level of daily discipline.

 

Typing in front of a computer doesn't make anyone enlightened.

 

In Vipassana retreats you will meet people from various traditions. I personally have met in Thailand the individuals from the folowing traditions:

 

1. Hindus. They like the Buddhist path but not strictly adhere to it.

2. Hebrews.

3. Followers of no religion or systematic spiritual practice. They saw Vipassana as a highly efficient method of spiritual cultivation.

4. Spiritual people like myself.

 

 

Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, in the end are just mere tags but it doesn't imply that the model laid down by the Buddha is the same as the rest. No, it is not, it has its own characteristics and it is suited for certain individuals, others may follow a different path and attain high level as well.

 

Anyway regardless of what path is followed you can't cast pearls before swine.

 

Now, I am curious about you. Care to upload a headshot of yourself so I could see the fruits of your practice?

 

Thanks.

[Blume]

Where is Mr.Dobles?

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

Do go through these articles...

 

* 1) Thusness/PasserBy's Seven Stages of Enlightenment

* 2) On Anatta (No-Self), Emptiness, Maha and Ordinariness, and Spontaneous Perfection

* 3) Realization and Experience and Non-Dual Experience from Different Perspectives

 

Thanks, I certainly will.

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

 

Are you looking exclusively for Buddhist dogma or are you open for a more over-arching understanding of Enlightenment?

 

 

I'm interested in all forms that call themselves 'enlightenment'. Even if I don't understand them I'll certainly try to attempt to understand them.

[C T]

I'm interested in all forms that call themselves 'enlightenment'. Even if I don't understand them I'll certainly try to attempt to understand them.

An admirable quality indeed Ninpo..

 

A quick answer here (a bit drawn out but please bear with me) to the question you posed earlier regarding bliss/joy:

(from personal insight using Buddhi-ish understanding/teachings)

 

All states that are manifested are neither good nor bad. They are all results of certain practices. These practices can be cultivated virtuously, or otherwise. When cultivated virtuously, the fruits will be virtuous, and will give rise to yet other virtuous seeds, which in turn will produce virtuous fruits, and so on. Its like a spiraling effect. With diligence, coupled with other virtuous means of cultivation, these right virtues will arise naturally. So bliss and joy are considered consequences, meaning they can both be the effect and the cause of other virtues.

 

There is no need to chase or hanker after them. To do so would attract the potential for unwholesome seeds to germinate, which may give rise to intents of greed, jealousy, envy, anger and so on. These intents are seeds that get sown in the mind, and given the appropriate conditions, will manifest. In time, these seeds may give rise to unwholesome thoughts, feelings, words and actions. If there is great mindfulness, then usually they can be spotted before any damage is done. If unnoticed, they become taints to the already gathered virtues, and thru this, the good fruits already cultivated can become unwholesome too. To prevent this from happening, the Buddha gave many teachings (according to some, it is said He gave a total of 84,000 different teachings to suit all the different needs of beings, but this is not relevant here) and paths towards stabilizing the new-born virtues, making them strong and resolute to ensure one does not fall off the wagon.

 

So states like bliss, joy, peace, happiness, all these are seedlings of enlightenment. They have to be nurtured diligently with the right practices thru mindful cultivation. One has to ever watchful, because every intention, no matter how subtle, will carry its equivalent latent energy, and when the conditions are ripe, they will sprout. In the same way, one is always encouraged to be watchful of the subtle (intentions, motives) to the less subtle (thoughts, feelings, emotions) to the grosser (words and deeds). There cannot be any doubt about this, since the law of cause and effect shows no bias, at work 25/8!

 

However, it is good to remember these states are not permanent, and when their energetic karmic winds cease, they will also cease. Cessation, however, does not mean dissapearance, for they can be 'transferred' to even higher states, or transcended states thru more practice. Of course, if one becomes filled with pride and think one has arrived, then the spiral of going backwards come into effect. Nothing stays still. Being impermanent, they will lead to greater and higher realizations. If they were permanent, it would mean one cannot go any further (stuck), and this negates and defeats the whole purpose of spiritual cultivation. When these realizations become second nature, then one is said to be resting once again in primordial awakeness. But there are no assurances even then. This awakeness too has to endure a period of stabilization. If one loses one's mindfulness, distractions will creep in like a stealthy thief in the night, and as mentioned, could pose a threat to even very highly realized masters (already mentioned in other threads).

 

Eventually, complete union is achieved by the realizer. This means that 'Method' (cultivation of virtues thru practice) which the initial path emphasizes, and which also keeps one grounded, will in time bring forth 'Wisdom' (non-conceptual realization, or some call this the deepest bodhichitta) - and when these two merge, all the good and right virtues spontaneously arise in one's being, and will no longer dissipate. In other words, self is dropped, only virtuous actions remain. Good things get done, but there will no longer be a doer of these things. Some call this state complete liberation, or total awakening.

 

Something to reflect on. I am sure others here will have even deeper insights into what i have said, so please feel free to add or subtract! Thanks.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

The language used by mystics allows you to get a peak into their realizations. Once you understand the 'map' then you can clearly see who is where. This sort of hierarchal view bothers some people. Maybe because they really want to believe that we're all on an Escalator to Heaven. In my experience, debating with people like Vajra, who is a very experienced practitioner, brought up fear and anxiety about my own path. It really made me question whether I truly understood the path and goal. It tore my life apart for a couple years, but was well worth it. Not many people allow themselves to be torn up like that. I found it be very positive, eventually

 

I had fun reading your post Mikaelz. Nice wit! You'd be a fun teacher when it comes time. (Not that your post wasn't already a good teaching, but you know what I mean) Thanks for the compliment as well.

 

Happy Mahamudraing!

Edited June 24, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

 

What happens is that many Buddhist, after they have their experience, think they are all that and start putting on a big act due to their dogma and preconditioning. so the enlightenment experience is what is real and it can last for a day or two, to say someone is enlightened (not the experience) is really a relative definition of their state and how close they can get to returning to the fullness of the original experience, if they even had that. You can be sure that many of them are putting on the act without even having the experience.

 

 

 

In Buddhism, enlightenment is not an experience, but rather insight into all experience and how it all works, leaving one free, as a direct experiencing. If you'd actually read some Buddhism, like the explanation of the Jhanas/samadhi's, you would see that there is outlined different depths to the wooowwie experience and yogi's with merit in meditation can attest to these truths. Enlightenment in Buddhist tradition is quite specific and not merely a woowwie experience.

 

It's not that Buddhists have a monopoly, it's just that Buddhism does in our era have the clearest system and methodology of approach. The Buddha was the first one to really systemize the path with so many variables for different types of people with a full on clear cosmology without the need for human or animal sacrifice... kind of new at the time. Sure there were extreme forrest yogi's and probably as such all over the world. He even said there were those that attained Buddhahood alone and they are called Pratyekabuddhas, but they don't teach, so no one generally knows about these ones. Shakyamuni Buddha was a Samyakasambuddha or a wheel turning Buddha who teaches a specific path of Buddhadharma with all it's variables, when no one else knows how in order to teach others how. Most other Buddhas are Savakabuddha or ones who attain by hearing of the Buddhadharma. People don't realize how much the Buddhas teachings actually inspired so many other spiritual traditions to clarity. Of course Taoism has it's own approach, but most of the really enlightening traditions are quite secret. Most people are only aware of folk Taoism or martial Taoism or the Tao as an all pervasive essence of things. This just wouldn't hold up to "Awake" (Buddha) criticism.

 

Anyway... here's an explanation.

 

Jhana via Wiki

 

Jhāna (Pāli: झन; Sanskrit: ध्यान dhyāna) is a meditative state of profound stillness and concentration. It is discussed in the Pāli canon (and the parallel agamas) and post-canonical Theravāda Buddhist literature.

In the early texts, it is taught as a state of collected, full-body awareness in which mind becomes very powerful and still but not frozen, and is thus able to observe and gain insight into the changing flow of experience.[1][2] Later Theravada literature, in particular the Visuddhimagga, describes it as an abiding in which the mind becomes fully immersed and absorbed in the chosen object of attention,[3] characterized by non-dual consciousness.[4]

The Buddha himself entered jhāna, as described in the early texts, during his own quest for enlightenment, and is constantly seen in the suttas encouraging his disciples to develop jhāna as a way of achieving awakening and liberation.[5][6][7]

One key innovative teaching of the Buddha was that meditative absorption must be combined with liberating cognition.[8]

Just before his passing away, The Buddha entered the jhānas in direct and reverse order, and the passing away itself took place after rising from the fourth jhāna.[9]

The Buddha's most well-known instructions on attaining jhana are via mindfulness of breathing, found in the Ānāpānasati Sutta and elsewhere.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

Ok 'Vajrahridaya'(cut and paste is such a joy), firstly thanks for answering all the questions.....

 

Cut and paste is a patience gathering gift of modern technology... yes!

 

Is this a Buddhist interpretation of 'mis-cognition'? What is the Buddhist 'end game' you speak of(although I do understand there isn't exactly one)? What was her mis-cognition and why was it incorrect(?).

 

Yes, it's a Buddha interpretation. What it means is that my Hindu Guru takes up the experience of non-duality as a source of all existence, rather than merely an insight. She doesn't understand emptiness or dependent origination, so doesn't have the "view" that liberates. For her, the entire cosmos arises out of this non-dual experience and will go back to, so her and along with all those that believe this will be re-absorbed at the end of the cosmic eon and liberation from Samsara as defined by a Buddha (awake one) is not attained. Though this state does have lots of bliss and powers of perception, etc. It is not the state of Buddhahood, but rather just being trapped in a formless Samadhi integrated with all matter through assumption or experiential excuse. This is deeply subtle, the difference between Monism (the belief in "one" that manifests the all) and Buddhism (the awake view that cuts through all pit stops). Basically this is why my Hindu lineage that I was born into has an incorrect view, simply because they take up a view as ultimate. What makes the Buddhist view as "right view" is that it's a viewless view and the only tradition that teaches the viewless view with clarity. I'm not saying an individual can't come to this insight by themselves. But as far as a tradition goes... Buddhism is the only one that really teaches this viewless view which never takes one view or the other as ultimate.

 

The End Game of Buddhahood just means that you have direct insight into all the states of awareness and experiences possible, but also manifest the 3 kayas (3 bodies), the body of emptiness which is really just the direct and constant insight into the empty nature and interconnectedness of all phenomena and ones awareness becomes all pervasive or omnipresent as the Dharmakaya, then the enjoyment body made of the energy of this realization of emptiness which is deep and free bliss known as the Sambhogakaya, and the body of expression which is utilized as a teaching body for those caught up in density is the Nirmanakaya. Though highly realized yogi's can get teachings directly from the enjoyment body of a Buddha, the Nirmanakaya is for the general public that has to see a dude or a lady in front of them who is a living example of the insight of Dharmakaya. So as a full blown Buddha, you are free (through realization of Dharmakaya), blissful (Ones energy is unlocked as Sambhogakaya), and you teach (Through the physical as Nirmanakaya). Through the realization of Dharmakaya, you are not re-absorbed at the end of a cosmic eon during the "big crunch" the opposite of the big bang.

 

 

Can you define 'clarity' for me please. How to judge clarity? Is this connected to 'mis-cognition'?

 

Clarity is pristine cognition into the nature of things. As in... you know directly how things work, including ones own mind and awareness. Mis-cognition would be a lack of clarity or seeing with confusion.

 

 

 

 

Ok, there are rather a lot of external links on the first page which is great(thanks all for the links), I'm gonna have to take a good look at all of them, so I can't comment at this time.

 

Please do take your time.

 

 

How can I be sure, absolutely sure, the above is not a mis-cognition? Why would living daily in life, happily, not be a form of enlightenment? What use is the above if ignorance of such could, possibly, be just as stimulating(without the comparison of enlightenment I could remain blissfully unaware of how unhappy I maybe actually am).

 

Living happily is a goal, but to always live happily and not die ignorant of the nature of death and not be re-born unconsciously through darkness is what it's about. Ones inner potential is completely illuminated and basically there is no more unconscious realm anymore, nor is there a subconscious realm for the enlightened. It's all illuminated. You are aware of where you are going when you die and you are happy when you die and you know in what realm you will take re-birth in and how you will take re-birth and you have clear intentions that are not muddled by selfish desire anymore, even though you still fully enjoy what comes including food, a wife, whatever... it all serves the greater good. Basically you have a certain type of omniscience into the nature of your own personal existence that transcends merely being happy in this life. So... enlightenment in Buddhism is always being happy, no matter where you travel to, and you are aware of what's happening, totally and fully, while fully enjoying what's happening as well. Even if you were to go to jail or something. Though generally this doesn't happen to Buddhas as they've purified their karma, but you never know... they would turn it into an opportunity to teach jail birds how to fly free while in the cage. :lol:

 

The above questions are not to say you are wrong, I understand part of your path is 'debate' so I'm hoping not only can you teach me something but you can also get something from it, I hope so anyway.

 

Edit: I gotta go for a tea break!

 

Yes indeed! Thank you for the opportunity. I hope your enjoyed your tea!

Edited June 24, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Starjumper]

Uncalled for Starjumper7. And, no, I asked a question on this thread to a Buddhist, so no, it wouldn't, in this case at least be nice if they shut their yaps about it.

 

The content within your two above quotes was interesting though. If there is a Daoist form of enlightenment then what is it? What is the Chinese word for this...I'm only asking so I can find out myself if this term can be translated to enlightenment in English. I'm kind of guessing the Daoist enlightenment may not be considered as Buddhist enlightenment. Therefore, I'm not sure it should be translated in to the English word enlightenment.

 

It's true, you asked a question so my comment may have been uncalled for on this thread but there has been evangelism on other threads, hasn't there?

 

Concerning the Taoist description of enlightenment, you will find one in the popular book "Opening the Dragon Gate". There are some other descriptions in some obscure texts, but I don't read much of those kinds of texts, particularly lately, and I do not keep foot notes.

 

Well, first of all. You are in a spiritual forum and as such learning how to respect others is a must. If you can't then look into yourself and see what changes can be done.

 

I can if I want to, but I do not subscribe to the play acting I described earlier.

 

No one said the Buddhist model holds a patent as you said. The call it Buddhist because their practitioners follow the path opened by someone who almost died seeking spiritual enlightenment unlike some who easily criticise something without having walked 0.05% of the path others like Gautama Buddha did. And by walking the path I mean renunciation of society's comfort, hard work, undergoing austerities and MATERIAL POVERTY and un unbelievable level of daily discipline.

 

Yes, but YOU said that Buddhist enlightenment was different than others, and there is an air of superiority being outgassed by Vaj the Buddhist and your post seemed to have some of that too.

 

Ya, Buddha almost died, blah blah blah, Jesus died, blah blah, big deal, give me a break.

 

I do want to point out that at least one Buddhist here, My good buddy Spirit Ape, is not like Vaj the Buddhist at all, I have a lot of respect for him and my criticisms are leveled at the armchair parrot types. Did you notice how Spirit Ape cleaned up his act when he started selling here? I might do that too.

 

I do want to address this idea of Buddhist enlightenment being 'different' if not also superior as claimed by Vajjy

 

There is the enlightenment experience, which is the same for everyone, but now we have to deal with the concept of being enlightened, which is different than the experience. The way people speak of 'being' enlightened doesn't necessarily include the cessation and bliss of the experience and is what I called the acting out of it, but better words to describe it might be unconditional love, super psychic, and emotionally mature, in various shades depending on how it plays out; and these things can evolve over a period of years after one has the experience if they play it right. Also, there can be no doubt that some people get to some of those same places simply by making an effort to control themselves, and they can go far, but is it really enlightenment? It all depends on how the definition has been bastardized over the years by priests. Ref - TTC #1

Edited June 24, 2010 by Starjumper7

[C T]

 

There is the enlightenment experience, which is the same for everyone, but now we have to deal with the concept of being enlightened, which is different than the experience. The way people speak of 'being' enlightened doesn't necessarily include the cessation and bliss of the experience and is what I called the acting out of it, but better words to describe it might be unconditional love, super psychic, and emotionally mature, in various shades depending on how it plays out; and these things can evolve over a period of years after one has the experience if they play it right.

Yes you are right about allowing the experience of blissful states to remain. Its not that hard to do. Just keep creating the same causes for bliss over and over and over, and sure enough, blissful experiences will abound. Then what? So you develop the capacity to love unconditionally, you become super psychic, and emotionally mature (?) in all the shades... then what?

 

Yes i know of many who spend all the best years of their lives chasing all the different levels of bliss, until they become so attached and stuck that they do not know where to go or what to do. So bliss, instead of aiding expansion, becomes its wrathful counterpart, and just contracts the person until... well, use your imagination.

 

There are many bliss junkies everywhere, not only in spiritual circles. Many of these live the high life, without a single want for anything material. They work out, they have their own minders, caretakers, butlers etc. Sure we read about all the stuff they get up to, the problems, the addictions - ask yourself why these things happen to people who (by golly) by normal standards, live like kings and queens?!! The principle is the same. Appearances may differ, but in essence, the cultivation and experience of acquired, impermanent states will have to seek expression in one way or another. The virtuous ones express them virtuously through their lifestyles, their demeanor, their interactions with others; alternatively the less virtuous ones express them in less virtuous ways. Its all relative. One cannot plant an apple seed and expect to get a plum fruit. There has to be integrity and accountability at some stage.

Edited June 24, 2010 by CowTao

[Starjumper]

I should have known, so now I'm a bliss junkie?

 

That's just frosting on the cake of the experience. You missed the main word - 'cessation', which includes all the other BS you people rant about.

 

I never did give a damn about enlightenment and I don't chase after bliss experiences nor powers. I think I'm done here now.

Edited June 24, 2010 by Starjumper7

[goldisheavy]

In response, Vajraji immediately sets up his own little world view of hierarchies, from Hinduism at the bottom to an elite Buddhist view on the top.

 

 

ralis

 

I don't think Hinduism is at the bottom for Vajrahridaya. He probably has "it" (or maybe some specific flavor) in the top 3. That my guess. Not that it matters all that much.

[garuda]

...............

 

Wise words in your posts, my friend!

 

Vajra, I cringe when we attempt to use absolute-world wisdom terms to address questions from the relative-world standpoint; wise nonetheless, but often misunderstood and falls short of direct-experience understanding. And more circular questions are often precipitated. As you likely already know, no answer will ever satisfy the (egoic) mind.

 

Incidentally, your Longchenpa signature block happens to be my most favorite quote. IMO, that quote says it all!

[Vajrahridaya]

As you likely already know, no answer will ever satisfy the (egoic) mind.

 

Well... it's said that words can bring one to enlightenment if formatted perfectly for any one persons karmic resonance, as words are symbols of experience at best. Of course this is going to be difficult in this medium, partially because there is no real body energy connection as done in physical presence and because so many different karmic baggages are reading the statements to begin with, so, only a few will get what I am relating even from merely an intellectual standpoint. Plus... I'm merely a practitioner on the path and not a full blow realizer. Merely glimpse happy. I am happy to learn from a fellow Dzogchenpa!

Incidentally, your Longchenpa signature block happens to be my most favorite quote. IMO, that quote says it all!

 

Yes, I find that the teachings of Longchenpa if one can get a hold of them... is all "I" really need. Well, that and transmission from a genuine Dzogchen master.

 

Pleasure to see a bird of your type fly this region!

 

Edited June 24, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

I don't think Hinduism is at the bottom for Vajrahridaya. He probably has "it" (or maybe some specific flavor) in the top 3. That my guess. Not that it matters all that much.

 

"pleads the 5th"

[ralis]

Well... it's said that words can bring one to enlightenment if formatted perfectly for any one persons karmic resonance, as words are symbols of experience at best.

 

 

 

 

You fail miserably in the word department.

 

 

ralis