All Prophets are Buddhas or How We Decide Who is Enlightened!

[Vajrahridaya]

 

I think that you're mistaken about how deep I have gone.

 

It's reflected in your beliefs of what you think is superstition reflecting lack of experience.

 

I'm going to leave you with a few questions, actually these are questions for anyone who's claiming to be a Buddhist. When was the last time you meditated?

 

I do sitting practice from time to time, though I experience the state of meditation very often and often in dream states. I did very intense practice for years, practice much like a monk in a cave would practice, for hours upon hours daily, all day, sleeping in a way that made it practice as well. Practicing like this, one compresses lifetimes worth of most peoples level of practice. As the energy doesn't dissipate like it does for instance if you meditate in the morning, but spend your day trading stocks and forgetting your state of mind, but come home and meditate again in the evening to get your state of mind back. This type of practice that most people do dissipates the energy that could have been utilized for going deeper. I know, not everyone can take a vacation from regular life and move into an Ashram or Monastery. I did at the age of 20 though.

 

When was the last time you showed compassion for another

 

The experience arises a lot. I live with my wife and my mother in law, and showing compassion is normal as they are both in need.

 

Do you think that compassion can't hit you over the head too though? Or slap you in the back with a stick like a Zen Master? Do you feel compassion has to manifest within the scope of your pre-conceptions?

 

, actually did something to ease someone's suffering?

 

On a daily basis, sometimes, if the opportunity arises, many times per day.

 

When was the last time you did something more than just talk about Buddhism?

 

All the time, even when talking about Buddhism, there is something more happening, contemplation, awareness of my state of mind, mantra (which is very powerful for me as it carries the energy of deep meditative states of which I've made samadhi impressions in my brain through.) Even when I'm disagreeing with you and challenging your state and understanding of enlightenment.

 

I doubt those that claim to have enlightenment without having followed a living lineage, more so than I do who follow a time tested, genuine lineage.

 

The ego is so tenacious, so subtle. We as living human beings need living guides. Those that say they don't, I really feel are truly fooling themselves. I'm not just talking about seeing everyone you meet as your guru, in that sort of way. I mean a living example of Buddhahood that comes from a genuine lineage of time tested tradition that has actually liberated people to the degree that the scriptures talk about.

[Aaron]

It's reflected in your beliefs of what you think is superstition reflecting lack of experience.

 

 

 

I do sitting practice from time to time, though I experience the state of meditation very often and often in dream states. I did very intense practice for years, practice much like a monk in a cave would practice, for hours upon hours daily, all day, sleeping in a way that made it practice as well. Practicing like this, one compresses lifetimes worth of most peoples level of practice. As the energy doesn't dissipate like it does for instance if you meditate in the morning, but spend your day trading stocks and forgetting your state of mind, but come home and meditate again in the evening to get your state of mind back. This type of practice that most people do dissipates the energy that could have been utilized for going deeper. I know, not everyone can take a vacation from regular life and move into an Ashram or Monastery. I did at the age of 20 though.

 

 

 

The experience arises a lot. I live with my wife and my mother in law, and showing compassion is normal as they are both in need.

 

Do you think that compassion can't hit you over the head too though? Or slap you in the back with a stick like a Zen Master? Do you feel compassion has to manifest within the scope of your pre-conceptions?

 

 

 

On a daily basis, sometimes, if the opportunity arises, many times per day.

 

 

 

All the time, even when talking about Buddhism, there is something more happening, contemplation, awareness of my state of mind, mantra (which is very powerful for me as it carries the energy of deep meditative states of which I've made samadhi impressions in my brain through.) Even when I'm disagreeing with you and challenging your state and understanding of enlightenment.

 

I doubt those that claim to have enlightenment without having followed a living lineage, more so than I do who follow a time tested, genuine lineage.

 

The ego is so tenacious, so subtle. We as living human beings need living guides. Those that say they don't, I really feel are truly fooling themselves. I'm not just talking about seeing everyone you meet as your guru, in that sort of way. I mean a living example of Buddhahood that comes from a genuine lineage of time tested tradition that has actually liberated people to the degree that the scriptures talk about.

 

Hello Vaj,

 

I'm done. I think everyone here can see my point but you. It's either ignorance or stubbornness, either way I'm not wasting any more time. I think that if you experienced what you claim to have experienced, then you would exemplify that in your actions, rather than get indignant when people actually prove to you that what you're doing is contrary to what Buddha taught. No hard feelings, but this is just wasted time.

 

Aaron

[Vajrahridaya]

Hello Vaj,

 

I'm done. I think everyone here can see my point but you. It's either ignorance or stubbornness, either way I'm not wasting any more time. I think that if you experienced what you claim to have experienced, then you would exemplify that in your actions, rather than get indignant when people actually prove to you that what you're doing is contrary to what Buddha taught. No hard feelings, but this is just wasted time.

 

Aaron

 

Edited July 6, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Simple_Jack]

Lolz...holy fuck, you guys are funny.

 

Anyways to add to what I typed earlier about "no-mind" in Zen: "No-Mind" is also described as when there isn't a sense of a "self" when interacting with people, phenomena, objects, whatever. In other words it could mean that there isn't the self-centerdness of an identification with a "self" carrying out actions or when interacting with the environment.

 

The closest article I could find describing this is this: "The term no-heart [no-mind] (wu-shin) comes from a Taoist background and was also used by the Buddhists. Chan [Zen] translates it as "no deliberate mind of one's own" or "no mind of one's own," and, in a Buddhist context, as "the non-being of the mind." As he explain in his discussion of the Neo-Taoism of Wang Pi (d. 249) and Kuo Hsiang (d. 312), the Taoist sage rises beyond all distinctions and contradictions while remaining in the midst of human affairs. 'In dealing with things he has 'no deliberate mind of his own' (wu-shin) but responds to them spontaneously without any discrimination....The Buddhist Chi-tsang (d. 623) writes that it means 'that one should not have an deliberate mind toward the myriad things." http://zennist.typepad.com/zenfiles/2010/11/no-mind-in-zen.html

 

Not the best description, but it's the gist of it. Also the Taoists did talk of this concept also. I know that Lao_tzu talked of this sort of thing.

 

Also the 6th Patriarch Hui-Neng also spoke out when people thought that "no-mind" meant having no thoughts or trying to suppress thoughts and clinging to immediate awareness. He said: "The pure clean mind of Dharmakaya (from moment to moment) is the correct path."

 

In other words it's like what the Diamond Sutra says: "You must let your mind be born without dwelling." Basically it is the approach taken by both Dzogchen and Mahamudra, when they talk about niether affirming or rejecting thoughts, but letting them be born without attachment or letting thoughts self-liberate naturally.

[ralis]

 

I didn't know that was you in another life!

[Vajrahridaya]

Lolz...holy fuck, you guys are funny.

 

Anyways to add to what I typed earlier about "no-mind" in Zen: "No-Mind" is also described as when there isn't a sense of a "self" when interacting with people, phenomena, objects, whatever. In other words it could mean that there isn't the self-centerdness of an identification with a "self" carrying out actions or when interacting with the environment.

 

The closest article I could find describing this is this: "The term no-heart [no-mind] (wu-shin) comes from a Taoist background and was also used by the Buddhists. Chan [Zen] translates it as "no deliberate mind of one's own" or "no mind of one's own," and, in a Buddhist context, as "the non-being of the mind." As he explain in his discussion of the Neo-Taoism of Wang Pi (d. 249) and Kuo Hsiang (d. 312), the Taoist sage rises beyond all distinctions and contradictions while remaining in the midst of human affairs. 'In dealing with things he has 'no deliberate mind of his own' (wu-shin) but responds to them spontaneously without any discrimination....The Buddhist Chi-tsang (d. 623) writes that it means 'that one should not have an deliberate mind toward the myriad things." http://zennist.typepad.com/zenfiles/2010/11/no-mind-in-zen.html

 

Not the best description, but it's the gist of it. Also the Taoists did talk of this concept also. I know that Lao_tzu talked of this sort of thing.

 

Also the 6th Patriarch Hui-Neng also spoke out when people thought that "no-mind" meant having no thoughts or trying to suppress thoughts and clinging to immediate awareness. He said: "The pure clean mind of Dharmakaya (from moment to moment) is the correct path."

 

In other words it's like what the Diamond Sutra says: "You must let your mind be born without dwelling." Basically it is the approach taken by both Dzogchen and Mahamudra, when they talk about niether affirming or rejecting thoughts, but letting them be born without attachment or letting thoughts self-liberate naturally.

 

Mad respect son! Thanks for this. I'm always on the look out for new and exciting Buddhist teachings out there. LOL!

 

Um, I mean old... but new to me.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[ralis]

Mad respect son! Thanks for this. I'm always on the look out for new and exciting Buddhist teachings out there. LOL!

 

Um, I mean old... but new to me.

 

You don't remember these teachings? I am really disappointed! What about your past lives as a Tibetan Buddhist.

[Vajrahridaya]

You don't remember these teachings? I am really disappointed! What about your past lives as a Tibetan Buddhist.

 

I know you're being patronizing. But, I don't remember all details of entire past lives, only some and the gist of information or rather the resonance of various states of mind occupied, which does include information that i can conceptualize now, but I don't have the same brain as I did in a past life... so, it's different from remembering yesterday per say, the page of a book I read as well as the title, etc.

 

I'm not saying it's impossible to see that though type of stuff though. I ain't that deep yet though my dude.

[goldisheavy]

I of course disagree. I think your argument is one sided, based upon never having the pleasure of experiencing a living tradition and it's incredible benefits. Of course, individuals do experience what you have just stated, and in many instances, you are right. But, it's not the traditions fault, if it's guided by liberated beings, it's the people who follow them who just don't have the strong intention for self questioning. Most traditions are ruined by those with power who are not in it for the essence of the tradition and are in it for the money, fame and power, either that or familial allegiance.

 

People do this all the time and it bothers me. People do this with tradition and with God.

 

When something positive is happening, credit is given to God or tradition. When something negative happens, no fault is assigned to God or tradition. This is very one sided and unequal. If traditions get credits for good things, they necessarily must get faulted for all the bad things as well. That's the true nature of responsibility. If traditions are not responsible for bad things occurring, there is no way they can be responsible for good things either.

 

Tradition is a mixed bad. It has good elements and bad. When you look around and see ignorant people, who do you thank? I thank tradition for that. It's our tradition to be ignorant as much as it is our tradition to be liberated.

 

Many of these liberating traditions you so esteem started as one person breaking away from tradition. The significance of that is not lost on those with the eyes to see and the ears to hear. It's not a coincidence that it is like that.

Edited July 7, 2011 by goldisheavy

[Vajrahridaya]

Many of these liberating traditions you so esteem started as one person breaking away from tradition. The significance of that is not lost on those with the eyes to see and the ears to hear. It's not a coincidence that it is like that.

 

Yes, but the Buddha still set out to start traditions that carried on his legacy, and since it worked, other Buddhas evolved the tradition that he left as well. Like anything, it's dependent upon your focus. My focus is on the positive because I want liberation, and not to be stuck in nit picking the ignorant side of anything. I'll just sift through my own ignorance using methods that are time tested, and have worked to liberate thousands to maybe even historically speaking, millions of individuals into full blown Buddhahood. I'm inspired by the Buddhas of my tradition, not the ones who didn't get it.

 

[ralis]

Yes, but the Buddha still set out to start traditions that carried on his legacy, and since it worked, other Buddhas evolved the tradition that he left as well. Like anything, it's dependent upon your focus. My focus is on the positive because I want liberation, and not to be stuck in nit picking the ignorant side of anything. I'll just sift through my own ignorance using methods that are time tested, and have worked to liberate thousands to maybe even historically speaking, millions of individuals into full blown Buddhahood. I'm inspired by the Buddhas of my tradition, not the ones who didn't get it.

 

 

Basically, one could argue your position from any point of view and belief system. All traditions only want to take credit for positive results and want no responsibility for negative results. The Buddha taught a view of totality which is as Gurdjieff would term it "all and everything". Leaving out what you find distasteful i.e, negativity, is realizing only a partial realization.

Edited July 7, 2011 by ralis

[Vajrahridaya]

Basically, one could argue your position from any point of view and belief system. All traditions only want to take credit for positive results and want no responsibility for negative results. The Buddha taught a view of totality which is as Gurdjieff would term it "all and everything". Leaving out what you find distasteful i.e, negativity, is realizing only a partial realization.

 

You guys are talking about individuals who call themselves Buddhist who have done bad things. This has nothing to do with the Buddhas teachings and tradition, but having to do with those individuals. Some parts that became tradition, or dogmas, concerning women, thinking you have to be reborn as a man to be a Buddha or whatever, are not part of my Buddhist tradition. There is not just one way to be Buddhist, obviously.

 

What you think is the traditions fault, is really only the fault of individuals, or groups of people. Thus, I don't focus on that as they don't represent the Dharma that I call home.

 

p.s. That's like blaming Jesus for people burning women as witches. Absurd! That's like blaming Buddha for the cult in Japan where they released poison gas on a subway.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[goldisheavy]

You guys are talking about individuals who call themselves Buddhist who have done bad things. This has nothing to do with the Buddhas teachings and tradition, but having to do with those individuals.

 

OK, so when individuals succeed, it's all thanks to the liberating traditions. When they fail, it's all because they are bad or incompetent individuals and the fault lies with the individual. Got it.

 

Here's something similar: when the corporation does well, the credit goes to the CEO. When it does poorly, the workers are blamed and fired. Sound familiar?

[Birch]

Here we go!

Ethics of Dogen

[Birch]

I like this one because it concurred with my pre-exisitng dea that buddhism is not the bearer of truth. It's a religion folks :-)

 

Oh, and to avoid nitpicking, as far as I know, so is taoism.

 

Is shamanism a religion?

 

Hum. Not sure.

Edited July 8, 2011 by -K-

[ralis]

I know you're being patronizing.

 

You are the master of patronizing and condescending remarks! Pretending that you are some guru by telling others what practices they should or shouldn't do or even judging where there progress is, is not inappropriate. Further, your psychic judgment of my progress is unwelcome. Especially, your assessment of what you deemed my lack of progress with the first two jhanas. You have no clue as to who I am or where my progress is.

 

Your judgments are only made by your own metric and only apply to you and no one else. You sound as if you are running a new age psychic hot line.

[Birch]

You are the master of patronizing and condescending remarks! Pretending that you are some guru by telling others what practices they should or shouldn't do or even judging where there progress is, is not inappropriate. Further, your psychic judgment of my progress is unwelcome. Especially, your assessment of what you deemed my lack of progress with the first two jhanas. You have no clue as to who I am or where my progress is.

 

Your judgments are only made by your own metric and only apply to you and no one else. You sound as if you are running a new age psychic hot line.

 

VAJ has psychic judgement? Awesome!

 

VAJ, could you give me the hotline/judgement number? It's (almost) just for fun. I've often been interested in seeing how people that irk me (and you do, but it's probably not your fault :-)) see me. Sounds like a full-on ego-trip :-)

[Vajrahridaya]

OK, so when individuals succeed, it's all thanks to the liberating traditions. When they fail, it's all because they are bad or incompetent individuals and the fault lies with the individual. Got it.

 

Here's something similar: when the corporation does well, the credit goes to the CEO. When it does poorly, the workers are blamed and fired. Sound familiar?

 

What a stupid comparison. Seriously disappointing and without insight.

 

The vast majority of people are just not ready, subjectively speaking to almost an inherent degree, relatively speaking as well, to be free and Buddha realized. The vast majority of humanity have not surfaced their potential to understand what the Buddha taught, regardless of how well he tried, he could not reach everyone to the degree he could ever hope, which is why one of his second statements was, "This realization is so profound, why even teach it, people will not understand."

 

This does include you, who thinks himself with such high esteem.

 

edit: spelling error.

 

This includes the lack luster mentalities of those that thumbed up your asinine comparison.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

You are the master of patronizing and condescending remarks! Pretending that you are some guru by telling others what practices they should or shouldn't do or even judging where there progress is, is not inappropriate. Further, your psychic judgment of my progress is unwelcome. Especially, your assessment of what you deemed my lack of progress with the first two jhanas. You have no clue as to who I am or where my progress is.

 

Your judgments are only made by your own metric and only apply to you and no one else. You sound as if you are running a new age psychic hot line.

 

 

Your lack of experience is reflected in your statements dearest ralis.

 

Let go bro... dig deeper. Or don't... just hate on me, whatever.

[goldisheavy]

What a stupid comparison. Seriously disappointing and without insight.

 

You know in your heart it's true.

[Vajrahridaya]

You know in your heart it's true.

 

Wow!!

 

More of this seems necessary...

 

 

The flaw in your logic is so clear to me, it's almost idiotic. It's also nuanced though, as you are clearly speaking from a lack of experience, and the particular level of experience I am talking about necessitates having really had living lineage, not merely an imaginary one.

 

Armchair pundits with no credentials. Or like ralis, could have had them, but threw them away due to pride and arrogance.

[Vajrahridaya]

OK, so when individuals succeed, it's all thanks to the liberating traditions. When they fail, it's all because they are bad or incompetent individuals and the fault lies with the individual. Got it.

 

Here's something similar: when the corporation does well, the credit goes to the CEO. When it does poorly, the workers are blamed and fired. Sound familiar?

 

Ok, this is what's wrong with your comparison. Corporations are dealing with mundane levels of profiteering. Spiritual traditions do not, but have to succumb to the financial system of support in place either locally or globally in order to maintain the dissemination of information.

 

This can corrupt any religion as well as support it's truth and positive essence of intention. When you have realization based upon the sincere and humble longing for truth, including questioning ones own projections, both conscious and subconscious, you come to sift through the surface, and see the underlying intention within a tradition. In Buddhism, there are so many beautifully endowed C.E.O's and plenty of them had great students. Plenty of them also had students of varying degrees of potential, but lots of money, or familial power. These are the ones that corrupted the teachings given by whatever C.E.O. after the initial progenitor, and created traditions that are superfluous compared to the essence of the enlightened traditions intention. Of course, these side tracks may have both good and bad fruit, dependent upon the person receiving it and their stage in personal evolution, which is so personally nuanced that one cannot judge it from outside. None the less, if these traditions became dogma due to the amount of people that believed in it, due to a majority lack of potential to see through it, which is general here on Earth, this mistake in interpretation might become staple through a certain strand of believers.

 

Of course, then there are those that are really interested with a burning passion to get to the essence of the teaching and see through the dross to the heat of it all. Buddhism has a long line of incredible exemplifiers that manifested and evolved a tradition that is quite perfect in meaning, though conceptually and methodologically adequate to the degree that if you are sincere in your self questioning and clearing of sight, the true meaning will be ascertained directly through it's presentation.

 

Anyway, to explain this will be so nuanced, if you don't get it by now... well. There is always Eternity, and lifetimes worth of cultivation.

 

GIH, you are so proud my dude. You really think you know, but you don't know what you don't know.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[JustARandomPanda]

There is always Eternity, and lifetimes worth of cultivation.

 

I do believe in such a thing as cause and effect. I'm also willing to believe this idea may extend further out than most Westerners do.

 

Just looking only at myself, my attainment (or rather lack thereof) my guess is that I'm a spiritual fetus.

 

I probably do not have many lifetimes of cultivation. In fact the thought has crossed my mind that if reincarnation is true then since I have pretty much no attainments of any sort I haven't really had many or probably even any attainments in prior lifetimes either. Maybe this is the very first lifetime I've even had any remote interest in cultivating to the point I'm actually putting time and effort into it.

 

I confess I am a fan of Bill Bodri despite the fact that he's quite opinionated and outspoken. Also a fan of Bodri's teacher Master Nan. I do get the impression from reading Master Nan's books he's not as opinionated as Bodri himself but he does offer guidance to seekers.

 

One thing Bodri (and I presume Master Nan originally) says is that if one cultivates correctly then the process is non-demonational. Proper cultivation (at least at the earlier stages I don't know what he thinks about the higher ones) will yield the same results no matter whether someone is a Buddhist, a Jew, a Hindu, Sufi or even an Atheist.

 

Another thing Bodri says is that reincarnation can be proven to one's self if one cultivates properly and deep enough. And this will happen no matter what religion you subscribe to or even to any religion at all. Proper cultivation will yield predictable results.

 

I suppose this is one of the things that I find attractive about Buddhism. That the Buddha - when you strip away a lot of the historical trappings, etc - seemed to be a practical guy. He said something to the effect of "if you do A,B,C you will get results X,Y,Z. But don't just take my word for it. You must do the work yourself to find out and prove it."

[Vajrahridaya]

One thing Bodri (and I presume Master Nan originally) says is that if one cultivates correctly then the process is non-demonational. Proper cultivation (at least at the earlier stages I don't know what he thinks about the higher ones) will yield the same results no matter whether someone is a Buddhist, a Jew, a Hindu, Sufi or even an Atheist.

 

This is true, suffice it to say they practice the 4 immeasurables of whatever description. 4 Immeasurables

 

"The brahmavihāras (sublime attitudes, lit. ‘abodes of brahma’) are a series of four Buddhist virtues and the meditation practices made to cultivate them. They are also known as the four immeasurables (Sanskrit: apramāṇa, Pāli: appamaññā).

 

According to the Metta Sutta, Shākyamuni Buddha held that cultivation of the four immeasurables has the power to cause the practitioner to be re-born into a Brahma realm (Pāli: Brahmaloka). The meditator is instructed to radiate out to all beings in all directions the mental states of: 1) loving-kindness or benevolence, 2) compassion, 3) sympathetic joy, and, 4) equanimity. The four immeasurables are also found in Patañjali's Yoga Sutras (1.33), a text composed long after the beginning of Buddhism and substantially influenced by Buddhism. These virtues are also highly regarded by Buddhists as powerful antidotes to negative mental states (non-virtues) such as avarice, anger and pride."

 

Virtually all paths cultivate these virtues to one degree or another. As the Buddha said, they do not lead to Buddhahood, but they do lead to perfection of virtue.

 

Another thing Bodri says is that reincarnation can be proven to one's self if one cultivates properly and deep enough. And this will happen no matter what religion you subscribe to or even to any religion at all. Proper cultivation will yield predictable results.

 

Of course, but which philosophies actually enunciate that? Not many, and Buddhism is the only one with exhaustive detail concerning that concept, Hinduism is second. As far as explanation goes at least. The other traditions you have to read into based upon what has been influenced by other traditions or outlooks, namely Buddhism and Hinduism. I know during early Christianity there were ideas thrown around about reincarnation as left over from Pythagoreanism and Plato, but the earliest Christian theologians seemed to throw that idea out the window.

 

I suppose this is one of the things that I find attractive about Buddhism. That the Buddha - when you strip away a lot of the historical trappings, etc - seemed to be a practical guy. He said something to the effect of "if you do A,B,C you will get results X,Y,Z. But don't just take my word for it. You must do the work yourself to find out and prove it."

 

Indeed!

 

As far as your attainment goes though, I don't know. But effort bares fruit, it can't do otherwise.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[goldisheavy]

Wow!!

 

More of this seems necessary...

 

 

The flaw in your logic is so clear to me, it's almost idiotic. It's also nuanced though, as you are clearly speaking from a lack of experience, and the particular level of experience I am talking about necessitates having really had living lineage, not merely an imaginary one.

 

Armchair pundits with no credentials. Or like ralis, could have had them, but threw them away due to pride and arrogance.

 

This is the kind of substantive and detailed criticism I've come to expect from you, Vaj.