Opening the Kundalini: How?

[Vajrahridaya]

The world view of Shamanism is a cosmology.

 

In some ways I think it is the failing of Buddhism in that it offers up a formula for liberation. I suspect that ultimately any such formula does not work ... its about praxis as Shaktmama says ... about your own experience and the wisdom it imparts to you ... you cannot formulate three steps to heaven despite Eddie Cochran et al.

 

Sorry I think I was answering Vaj and not you Shaktimama ... ( ).

 

Yes, but a formula for the way to "right" praxis, that is clear and concise as Buddhism is, is not a failure at all. Besides, it's also not praxis as that too is empty of inherent selfhood and arises due to cause and condition, thus, one must empty that as well of any clinging, but then that as well is an intuition.

 

Praxis, or intuition is hard to transfer from person to person, generally speaking, but a codified system towards the praxis of "right view" is not.

 

One can indeed formulate 8 steps to heaven, even if it's not total liberation, if one actually follows the 8 fold path with forbearance and forgiveness upon oneself, heaven is guaranteed and so is liberation, eventually.

 

Also the world view of Shamanism of any sort generally revolves around a primal self standing essence. It's as if all paths go as deep as the big bang, and say's... "it's a mystery", and no deeper. Buddhist cosmology does and it demystifies this self standing essence, breaks it down and sees right through it and past it. It's like anti-gravity. That mystery is a gravitational force and Buddhism de-conditions it's power with it's "right view". As in general Shamanism treats this mystery with some inherent essence, and is blinded by the amazing bliss and peace that comes with surrendering on that level. Thus, there doesn't come the level of insight required to grok or have praxis in the true insight of how things happen any deeper than ending up at that mysterious essence that acts as a powerful emotional excuse to not pry the door any more open.

Edited June 7, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Harmonious Emptiness]

All codified post Buddha. I'm familiar with so many native stories, and like I said they are good and nice, but they don't manifest as well defined a map of the nature of the different levels of Samadhi/Jhana, the mis-steps that can happen, which many of these traditions fall into as the subconscious unravels and all sorts of manifestations become reflected through the sense perceivable world, or psychic world even. There is no clear definition of dependent origination/emptiness, just experiences as excuses for virtue, but not really a deep understanding of the nature of Samsaric cycling. All these traditions reify to an ultimate self standing existence, or a god of some sort, a true Self nature, this is not conducive to the same level of wisdom as the Buddhas teaching.

 

I'm not saying other traditions didn't exist before the Buddha, of course they did, they just didn't clearly define the structure of methodology in a systematic fashion like the Buddha did. There were others post Buddha that did for different traditions. But even Socrates, who I'm a fan of, is post Buddha and didn't come to the same level of depth as the Buddha, but inspiring non-the-less.

 

I agree, they do inspire, and are clarified as to the meaning and source of their arisings from one level or another of the 31 realm model so well defined by Buddha.

 

Read this, since you seem to have an interest in Buddhism... 31 planes of existence

 

The creation stories from these different ancient traditions come from one level or another of these 31 planes and do not add up to the profound truth of dependent origination/emptiness.

 

The Khemetic/Egyptian temples had their system all layed out on the walls. It took initiation and lifelong scholarship to understand it though. Thus, it was codified, and the temples go back to before The Buddha.

 

For me to expound anything about the existence of dependent-origination knowledge in other cultures would be pointless since the knowledge of this is only known by experience, but you won't be hard pressed to find a Shaman with the same view of existence - such as the fact that the manifestations of this world are just symptomatic of a deeper reality.

 

I agree that Buddhism has the most systematic writings of their kind that have remained up to this date (I think the Library of Alexandria probably had more and of the same kind), but to say they are the first of their kind, or that they are the only ones of their kind, save those directly influenced, is incorrect.

 

On the other hand, I'm glad to hear that you do in fact appreciate Aboriginal culture, as some of what you were saying sounded like it was coming from an 18th century Southern Baptist minister.

[Vajrahridaya]

The Khemetic/Egyptian temples had their system all layed out on the walls. It took initiation and lifelong scholarship to understand it though. Thus, it was codified, and the temples go back to before The Buddha.

 

For me to expound anything about the existence of dependent-origination knowledge in other cultures would be pointless since the knowledge of this is only known by experience, but you won't be hard pressed to find a Shaman with the same view of existence - such as the fact that the manifestations of this world are just symptomatic of a deeper reality.

 

I agree that Buddhism has the most systematic writings of their kind that have remained up to this date (I think the Library of Alexandria probably had more and of the same kind), but to say they are the first of their kind, or that they are the only ones of their kind, save those directly influenced, is incorrect.

 

On the other hand, I'm glad to hear that you do in fact appreciate Aboriginal culture, as some of what you were saying sounded like it was coming from an 18th century Southern Baptist minister.

 

Well, all I want to say is that the truth is in the details.

 

also,

 

Of course I'm inspired by anything good and uplifting!

[Apech]

Yes, but a formula for the way to "right" praxis, that is clear and concise as Buddhism is, is not a failure at all. Besides, it's also not praxis as that too is empty of inherent selfhood and arises due to cause and condition, thus, one must empty that as well of any clinging, but then that as well is an intuition.

 

Praxis, or intuition is hard to transfer from person to person, generally speaking, but a codified system towards the praxis of "right view" is not.

 

One can indeed formulate 8 steps to heaven, even if it's not total liberation, if one actually follows the 8 fold path with forbearance and forgiveness upon oneself, heaven is guaranteed and so is liberation, eventually.

 

Also the world view of Shamanism of any sort generally revolves around a primal self standing essence. It's as if all paths go as deep as the big bang, and say's... "it's a mystery", and no deeper. Buddhist cosmology does and it demystifies this self standing essence, breaks it down and sees right through it and past it. It's like anti-gravity. That mystery is a gravitational force and Buddhism de-conditions it's power with it's "right view". As in general Shamanism treats this mystery with some inherent essence, and is blinded by the amazing bliss and peace that comes with surrendering on that level. Thus, there doesn't come the level of insight required to grok or have praxis in the true insight of how things happen any deeper than ending up at that mysterious essence that acts as a powerful emotional excuse to not pry the door any more open.

 

Any formula or method can only produce a set of effects which depend on the steps of the method. Shamanism is of course a term which has been applied in a modern way so we need to be careful about that. Someone mentioned Egypt where they mapped out the path with extreme accuracy and precision (for instance in the Amduat). So I am not against maps at all.

 

Obviously as we have discussed many times before the Buddhist view critiques any other view which seems to have an underlying real cause or essence. This, as I see it, is a way of avoiding clinging to that cause and avoiding dualistic thinking i.e. IT and me. However the real root of this and the only reason it has any bite at all as a way of thinking is the face-to-face reality of the real (if you forgive this phrase) which is based on inner realisation or experience (perhaps inperience would be a better word).

[everseeking]

Perhaps if somehow the secret/ private library that the Vatican keeps were to be made accessible to the world, Vaj's notion ( - and everyone else's in this thread- ) of who does or does not historically have a codified system for reaching enlightenment might be turned on end;-)

 

I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but doesn't it seem unjust that they have a huge repository of cultural relics going back to who knows when and its closed off from the public?

 

Who knows what teachings are hidden within there.

 

I read that there are huge amounts of Mayan artifacts and who knows, maybe more written history. Maybe the Dresden codex wasn't all that survived.

 

Anyone else ticked off by this secrecy? I wish someone would demand the library be opened.

 

Just some food for thought, since this thread seems to be revolving around what we are * aware of* historically.

[Birch]

We don't need shamanism. We have TV.

[C T]

... which is based on inner realisation or experience (perhaps inperience would be a better word).

Would you consider Inner non-dualisation? Maybe? It could be quite an ornament to put it next to this gem 'inperience'... (nudge nudge wink wink )

[Vajrahridaya]

Any formula or method can only produce a set of effects which depend on the steps of the method. Shamanism is of course a term which has been applied in a modern way so we need to be careful about that. Someone mentioned Egypt where they mapped out the path with extreme accuracy and precision (for instance in the Amduat). So I am not against maps at all.

 

Well sure, I know this story. It's interesting, but it's metaphorical. None of the texts that we have from ancient Sumer or Egypt talk clearly about the stages of actual sitting meditation the multiple realms, the cause and result of various types of focus. The closest we seem to come to any sort of systemized clarity from that region is Kabbalah. I mean, you have to read into it and the way we are reading into it now after having been exposed to so much information from the last 2,500 years is not how we would have read into it way back when.

 

My point is these supposedly ancient maps can be interpreted in so many different ways. They don't point to clarity with clarity in my opinion. They can when one already has some clarity, but that's like anything, which is subjective. I find that the steps of Buddhist philosophy and practice lead to a deeper sense of objectivity, towards "oneself" the experiencer in reference to everything else in both a transcendent and simultaneously eminent way. This transcends both objective and subjective modes of thinking and yet makes them one in an integral fashion for the individual. This is the genius of dependent origination/emptiness. There isn't a subjective idealism and there isn't a monistic idealism, yet it utilizes all of it so that one may grok directly the nature of things without a sense of bondage, this has it's omniscience.

 

Obviously as we have discussed many times before the Buddhist view critiques any other view which seems to have an underlying real cause or essence. This, as I see it, is a way of avoiding clinging to that cause and avoiding dualistic thinking i.e. IT and me. However the real root of this and the only reason it has any bite at all as a way of thinking is the face-to-face reality of the real (if you forgive this phrase) which is based on inner realisation or experience (perhaps inperience would be a better word).

 

Inperience = from a root meaning to test, to try out. perhaps would have a meaning of garnering self knowledge through trial?

 

A new word! Wow, it seems like a rare word as well? Is that what you meant by the word, it does seem so.

 

Yes, I agree, there is no such thing as non-existence and this is all Buddhism is saying that everything is relative. There is no uncaused cause, and even Egyptian lore only goes so far within the 31 realms model and as far as what we have of it, there isn't that clarity, that grounded lucidity. It's all open for interpretation, like what do we really know about these people and their traditions from way back when? I don't doubt that there might have been powerful beings, possibly with incredible powers of perception back then. Later there were all sorts of cults surrounding the different names of the gods, like they had in India. But, in India they met with the path of meditation and maybe that's the influence that became these Tantric Rituals? As it seems they had all sorts of rituals but not really a mapped out path of meditation and insight into phenomena outside of superstition. I am no Egyptologist though, so... I am willing to be educated more. But, look at people like Aleister Crowley and Thelema of which I've been initiated into. Which is all supposed to be based upon a mixing of all sorts of ancient Egyptian stuff. I have indeed met some very interesting people in Thelema with a great knowledge of the meaning of these Egyptian metaphors. Anyway... interesting, but a clear path with a clearly understood goal? I don't see it.

[Vajrahridaya]

Perhaps if somehow the secret/ private library that the Vatican keeps were to be made accessible to the world, Vaj's notion ( - and everyone else's in this thread- ) of who does or does not historically have a codified system for reaching enlightenment might be turned on end;-)

 

I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but doesn't it seem unjust that they have a huge repository of cultural relics going back to who knows when and its closed off from the public?

 

Who knows what teachings are hidden within there.

 

I read that there are huge amounts of Mayan artifacts and who knows, maybe more written history. Maybe the Dresden codex wasn't all that survived.

 

Anyone else ticked off by this secrecy? I wish someone would demand the library be opened.

 

Just some food for thought, since this thread seems to be revolving around what we are * aware of* historically.

 

I agree! I'm not ticked off as I have Buddhism, from Theravada resulting in "Arhat" to Dzogchen resulting in "Jalus", but man... that would be extremely interesting.

 

They do this in order to hold power, it's not like keeping a secret that one is not ready for until one has completed some sort of inner to physical preparatory work like Tantric or Taoist lineages, it's definitely to just keep people ignorant and in the dark. Who knows what kind of proofs they have of anything that we know of today as far as human history goes? That is definitely one of the great mysteries of today. What is in the Vatican vaults???

[Vajrahridaya]

We don't need shamanism. We have TV.

 

No doubt, and there are some great fictional shows that revolve around this Vatican mystery. LOL! As silly as they seem to be. Who knows what the truth about that is? Does the Pope even know?

[Vajrahridaya]

Would you consider Inner non-dualisation? Maybe? It could be quite an ornament to put it next to this gem 'inperience'... (nudge nudge wink wink )

 

It's a pretty cool word, and I actually found it defined online. Wow. Yes... inward based non-dualisation, kind of an oxymoronic statement, but it has meaning, none the less.

[Sahaj Nath]

[Vajrahridaya]

[Sahaj Nath]

Yes, this doesn't mean that all roads lead to Rome though, just a few of them lead to Rome.

 

 

true, but it DOES mean that the road doesn't have to be paved, and that the path doesn't necessarily have to be a road.

 

i get what you AND 5et are saying in this thread, but you overestimate the importance of learned, structured material.

 

i know you've done your homework. and i also know that you've had your direct experiences for which the written word is at best an almost fictional substitute. so you couldn't possibly believe that institutionalized protocols of spiritual study and practice came PRIOR to enlightenment. and if they didn't come prior, then they cannot be essential. but your dismissive attitude toward the indigenous peoples and their practices (and NO, you DON'T have enough experience there to assess the quality of their spiritual culture. cut that out.) is grating on my very soul right now.

 

the beauty of the oral traditions and the indigenous practices is the very point of contention here. the chaos present in their ways is not a flaw; it's the very crucible of their genius! the practitioner gets out of the way and surrenders to being overtaken by something they believe to be greater than themselves. something they believe to be the essence of GOD. and it doesn't manifest itself in a consistent pattern or in a specific linear progression of conscious expansion. what is to manifest is born radically in that moment, and it's not following a script. that they don't have an intellectual language to express it in a way the white folks are bound to respect only means that you are not in a position to judge. your vantage point is not objective. it's not value-free. if nothing else, your direct experiences should have demonstrated to you the extent to which you really don't know what you don't know, and to which the intellect generates useless approximations of these wisdoms. and i believe that the TRUE authorities in buddhism, like Sogyal Rinpoche, GET THIS!

 

so yeah, i'm with shaktimama.

Edited June 8, 2011 by Hundun

[C T]

true, but it DOES mean that the road doesn't have to be paved, and that the path doesn't necessarily have to be a road.

 

i get what you AND 5et are saying in this thread, but you overestimate the importance of learned, structured material.

 

i know you've done your homework. and i also know that you've had your direct experiences for which the written word is at best an almost fictional substitute. so you couldn't possibly believe that institutionalized protocols of spiritual study and practice came PRIOR to enlightenment. and if they didn't come prior, then they cannot be essential. but your dismissive attitude toward the indigenous peoples and their practices (and NO, you DON'T have enough experience there to assess the quality of their spiritual culture. cut that out.) is grating on my very soul right now.

 

the beauty of the oral traditions and the indigenous practices is the very point of contention here. the chaos present in their ways is not a flaw; it's the very crucible of their genius! the practitioner gets out of the way and surrenders to being overtaken by something they believe to be greater than themselves. something they believe to be the essence of GOD. and it doesn't manifest itself in a consistent pattern or in a specific linear progression of conscious expansion. what is to manifest is born radically in that moment, and it's not following a script. that they don't have an intellectual language to express it in a way the white folks are bound to respect only means that you are not in a position to judge. your vantage point is not objective. it's not value-free. if nothing else, your direct experiences should have demonstrated to you the extent to which you really don't know what you don't know, and to which the intellect generates useless approximations of these wisdoms. and i believe that the TRUE authorities in buddhism, like Sogyal Rinpoche, GET THIS!

 

so yeah, i'm with shaktimama.

You speak like someone of great experience, Hundun lol. Wish all of us were at your level... Of course all the masters get it, thats why they are masters. I had fun cooking for Sogyal Rinpoche on a number of occasions in the past, and was fortunate to have accessed his presence on a deeper level than others thru this service. I know what you are saying, and i agree. But he does not advocate a structureless path at all. He says that as sentient beings the potential for freedom is equally available to all, and that our nature and the nature of the Buddhas are exactly the same, but, we cant see this clearly, and so have to work at revealing and stabilizing this innate expression of enlightenment thru practice.

 

The way i see it, there are two ways to learn how to swim - either with a guide and all the necessary devices, or to venture out alone. Who can say for sure which way yields the correct result? There are also two depths where one can experience what it means to drown. One is at the shallow end, where your legs can touch the bottom, and upon lifting up the legs, you get a 'feel' of what it means to drown, without actually drowning. Or there is the other option.

Edited June 8, 2011 by CowTao

[everseeking]

Would just like to say, FWIW I don't get my info about the Vatican 's library, or the history of the Catholic church from TV or movies or fiction books. I get ( got) it from history books. And history classes at a university.

 

 

:-)

 

I really feel its very important to know our (vast human) history, which is much deeper than even the publicly available historical records.

For example, the water erosion seen on Sphynx in Egypt, which is impossible according to the accepted timelines.

 

We have been here probably much longer than we think, IMO. And I agree with Vaj, they want to hide the truth ( in general about history ) to control.

 

N~

[Apech]

Would you consider Inner non-dualisation? Maybe? It could be quite an ornament to put it next to this gem 'inperience'... (nudge nudge wink wink )

 

Well I was thinking 'ex' means 'out' and so experience means tested in the outer world - so if you test it in the inner world its got to be an inperience. Just a thought.

[Apech]

Well sure, I know this story. It's interesting, but it's metaphorical. None of the texts that we have from ancient Sumer or Egypt talk clearly about the stages of actual sitting meditation the multiple realms, the cause and result of various types of focus. The closest we seem to come to any sort of systemized clarity from that region is Kabbalah. I mean, you have to read into it and the way we are reading into it now after having been exposed to so much information from the last 2,500 years is not how we would have read into it way back when.

 

My point is these supposedly ancient maps can be interpreted in so many different ways. They don't point to clarity with clarity in my opinion. They can when one already has some clarity, but that's like anything, which is subjective. I find that the steps of Buddhist philosophy and practice lead to a deeper sense of objectivity, towards "oneself" the experiencer in reference to everything else in both a transcendent and simultaneously eminent way. This transcends both objective and subjective modes of thinking and yet makes them one in an integral fashion for the individual. This is the genius of dependent origination/emptiness. There isn't a subjective idealism and there isn't a monistic idealism, yet it utilizes all of it so that one may grok directly the nature of things without a sense of bondage, this has it's omniscience.

 

 

 

Inperience = from a root meaning to test, to try out. perhaps would have a meaning of garnering self knowledge through trial?

 

A new word! Wow, it seems like a rare word as well? Is that what you meant by the word, it does seem so.

 

Yes, I agree, there is no such thing as non-existence and this is all Buddhism is saying that everything is relative. There is no uncaused cause, and even Egyptian lore only goes so far within the 31 realms model and as far as what we have of it, there isn't that clarity, that grounded lucidity. It's all open for interpretation, like what do we really know about these people and their traditions from way back when? I don't doubt that there might have been powerful beings, possibly with incredible powers of perception back then. Later there were all sorts of cults surrounding the different names of the gods, like they had in India. But, in India they met with the path of meditation and maybe that's the influence that became these Tantric Rituals? As it seems they had all sorts of rituals but not really a mapped out path of meditation and insight into phenomena outside of superstition. I am no Egyptologist though, so... I am willing to be educated more. But, look at people like Aleister Crowley and Thelema of which I've been initiated into. Which is all supposed to be based upon a mixing of all sorts of ancient Egyptian stuff. I have indeed met some very interesting people in Thelema with a great knowledge of the meaning of these Egyptian metaphors. Anyway... interesting, but a clear path with a clearly understood goal? I don't see it.

 

The ancient texts have to be read properly to be understood - which is something Egyptologists or archeologists struggle to do because they have no basis or experience (inperience) of meditiation or energy working. But if you use a phenomenological approach - that is let the text 'speak' to you then you can with a lot of work get understanding. But the point is that this understanding would be a cultural norm in ancient times but has now been lost to us because of (at least ) 2000 years of interference from Judeo-Christian (and to a certain extent Greek thought).

 

The Egyptian system had a clearly understood goal of becoming '3kh' ... although that would take a lot of explaining nowadays. I don't bother with kabbalah or Crowley much although have read a bot of both.

 

If the question is - was there a properly mapped out system for liberation before Buddhism the answer is yes (IMO) but if the question is 'is there an extant system which pre-dates Buddhism?' well probably no ... have we discounted yoga schools ???not sure(?).

 

My other point is that maps, mandalas and world views (e.g. shamanic) are good and valid ... but formulaic methods don't and can't work. For instance some Buddhists schools will tell you that if you sit in this posture and chant this mantra 100,000 times etc you will automatically become enlightened (or at least gain some level of liberation). This in my view is pure b/s.

 

Codes for life can be helpful of course. You don't walk down the high street naked (well you might Vaj I'm not sure ) you wear clothes which make you accepted and acceptable to people ... this is in my view the status of right living and so on ... its a good code for life which keeps you sufficiently balanced that you can get on with practice without a lot of hoohaa going on in your life ... same with gathering merit which gives you a chance of what Gampopa calls 'leisure and endowment' ... so that you can practice in peace.

[fiveelementtao]

i get what you AND 5et are saying in this thread,

Huh?

I didn't realize that Vaj and I were saying the same thing. I sure as hell am not making any arguments for the superiority of buddhism and I have great respect for shamans of all kinds.

 

Let's get back on topic because it is an important one and I think many would benefit from an intelligent discussion instead of the usual taobums devolution into intellectual minutiae...

 

The original topic was "How to Open Kundalini?"

 

besides my response, I have only heard three possible methods outlined in this thread:

1) Through accident, fear or illness

2) through random breath and energy practices

3) shaktipat.

 

These three methods ASSUME that Kundalini must only be dealt with through damage control after the fact OR that the individual is either a victim of circumstance or a passive receiver. Yes, those are some of the ways that stimulate Kundalini but they are not the only ways! It is also possible to raise Kundalini in a conscious controlled manner without all the drama and craziness. I gave one example from a proven and ancient discipline in the hopes that one of the forum's many resident kundalini experts would share alternative methods based on their understanding and experience... Instead, some people allowed my overbearing warrior manner to push their male authority issue buttons..

 

For those that have awakened it spontaneously. I believe that is a different subject than the original question. Because once Kundalini has been awakened in that fashion, it has to be controlled or managed.

 

BUT...If She is awakened consciously and in a controlled manner, She is quite pleasant as well as life changing. I want to hear about these kinds of proactive methods for the sake of the newbies who want to experience Her.

 

I gave my .02. Now I want to hear from others with some knowledge and experience...

Edited June 8, 2011 by fiveelementtao

[Sahaj Nath]

You speak like someone of great experience, Hundun lol. Wish all of us were at your level... Of course all the masters get it, thats why they are masters. I had fun cooking for Sogyal Rinpoche on a number of occasions in the past, and was fortunate to have accessed his presence on a deeper level than others thru this service. I know what you are saying, and i agree. But he does not advocate a structureless path at all. He says that as sentient beings the potential for freedom is equally available to all, and that our nature and the nature of the Buddhas are exactly the same, but, we cant see this clearly, and so have to work at revealing and stabilizing this innate expression of enlightenment thru practice.

 

The way i see it, there are two ways to learn how to swim - either with a guide and all the necessary devices, or to venture out alone. Who can say for sure which way yields the correct result? There are also two depths where one can experience what it means to drown. One is at the shallow end, where your legs can touch the bottom, and upon lifting up the legs, you get a 'feel' of what it means to drown, without actually drowning. Or there is the other option.

 

i never said that he ADVOCATES a structureless path. i didn't even imply that. he's a Tibetan lama, so duh. what i'm saying is that he gets that the state or condition (whatever you want to call it) of enlightenment does not belong to buddhism or any established tradition, and therefore doesn't exclude the other, lesser understood, indigenous or ecstatic ways. what i'm saying is nothing more than the obvious.

 

some flowers study methods on how to bloom, but that doesn't make them the gatekeepers of the sun.

[markern]

Normally we are told you can`t really get anywhere without live instruction, without person to person interaction and the communication that is without words. Now we are told we can`t get anywhere without the written word?

[fiveelementtao]

Normally we are told you can`t really get anywhere without live instruction, without person to person interaction and the communication that is without words. Now we are told we can`t get anywhere without the written word?

Who is saying that?

[Vajrahridaya]

true, but it DOES mean that the road doesn't have to be paved, and that the path doesn't necessarily have to be a road.

 

i get what you AND 5et are saying in this thread, but you overestimate the importance of learned, structured material.

 

i know you've done your homework. and i also know that you've had your direct experiences for which the written word is at best an almost fictional substitute. so you couldn't possibly believe that institutionalized protocols of spiritual study and practice came PRIOR to enlightenment. and if they didn't come prior, then they cannot be essential. but your dismissive attitude toward the indigenous peoples and their practices (and NO, you DON'T have enough experience there to assess the quality of their spiritual culture. cut that out.) is grating on my very soul right now.

 

I said except for exceptional individuals... go back and re-read what I read. I'm saying if the exceptional individuals don't leave behind a codified structure of material, nothing gets passed on.

 

the beauty of the oral traditions and the indigenous practices is the very point of contention here. the chaos present in their ways is not a flaw; it's the very crucible of their genius! the practitioner gets out of the way and surrenders to being overtaken by something they believe to be greater than themselves. something they believe to be the essence of GOD. and it doesn't manifest itself in a consistent pattern or in a specific linear progression of conscious expansion. what is to manifest is born radically in that moment, and it's not following a script. that they don't have an intellectual language to express it in a way the white folks are bound to respect only means that you are not in a position to judge. your vantage point is not objective. it's not value-free. if nothing else, your direct experiences should have demonstrated to you the extent to which you really don't know what you don't know, and to which the intellect generates useless approximations of these wisdoms. and i believe that the TRUE authorities in buddhism, like Sogyal Rinpoche, GET THIS!

 

so yeah, i'm with shaktimama.

 

All this that you have said is a reaction based upon taking certain sentences of mine out of context. I'm not dismissing these Shamans as having nothing good to teach, I'm just saying if they are genuinely "Buddhas", then they would have an explanation. As well, language isn't White Man's invention. Wow.

 

Again, I reference people to the 31 Planes of Existence which is a very deep teaching. Just because someone has some good techniques, awakens "kundalini" which many traditions have created a dogma around by the way, or have lots of love, bliss and even some supernatural powers, doesn't mean they are Buddhas and teach the same level of teaching as the Buddhadharma.

 

If one studies what the Buddhas have said, they know this. I'm not dismissing the inspirational power of Shamans. As well... I do actually have plenty of experience and memory to know directly what I do know, which does cover enough ground to make an informed opinion. There are many levels of wisdom bliss, many levels of samadhi, many stages of enlightenment, then there is Buddhahood. If you identify with being a tribal member or something, I can understand wanting to rebel against such information. But, why be so attached?

 

Please read everything I write from a holistic standpoint and not react off sentences pulled out of context, within your own mind.

 

You pull Sogyal Rinpoches teaching out of context as well. Of course realization transcends religion, but it is expressed a certain way, and that way is the Mahayana view that encompasses so much. The Buddha explained all this, he is definitely the Muni of this Kali Yuga. He was very clear, leaving no room for emotional assumptions.

Edited June 8, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[C T]

 

My other point is that maps, mandalas and world views (e.g. shamanic) are good and valid ... but formulaic methods don't and can't work. For instance some Buddhists schools will tell you that if you sit in this posture and chant this mantra 100,000 times etc you will automatically become enlightened (or at least gain some level of liberation). This in my view is pure b/s.

 

Codes for life can be helpful of course. You don't walk down the high street naked (well you might Vaj I'm not sure ) you wear clothes which make you accepted and acceptable to people ... this is in my view the status of right living and so on ... its a good code for life which keeps you sufficiently balanced that you can get on with practice without a lot of hoohaa going on in your life ... same with gathering merit which gives you a chance of what Gampopa calls 'leisure and endowment' ... so that you can practice in peace.

Is that what they told you when you were practicing Vajrayana, Apech? I will find it odd if they did.

[Sahaj Nath]

Huh?

 

 

didn't mean to throw you two together that way. my bad. i just read through the thread really quick, and you two were the ones i wanted to respond to.

 

with respect to you, it was just the one comment:

 

...kundalini needs a framework from within which to work. Otherwise it is chaotic.

 

to which i say that chaos is not necessarily an evil to be avoided, and that kundalini needs an open and willing vessel, framework optional. i could flesh that out some, but that's my basic gist, just for clarification.

 

okay, off to bed.