Three Kinds of Spiritual Teachings.

[Vajrahridaya]

[Informer]

Getting rid of belief is easy.

 

Just stop assuming.

 

[Vmarco]

I can see that as being a nice step forward, but you'll need some political power to get that done.

 

 

Think Internet! Think the 100th Monkey!

 

Have you ever read Colin Wilson's "Mind Parasites" It really wouldn't take very many honest people to initiate the world on a path to a higher vibration and love. I feel there are many people desireous for something like that,...even if they had to let go of a few beliefs.

 

Ever see a fireman or anyone rush into a flaming car to rescue someone? I think humanity is ready for a quantum leap beyond the mental viruses that maintain suffering, dispair, disconnectedness, etc.

 

Remember,..."love waits only on welcome." Yes,...welcome is a HUGE step,...but do-able this very year.

 

V

[Vajrahridaya]

Think Internet! Think the 100th Monkey!

 

Have you ever read Colin Wilson's "Mind Parasites" It really wouldn't take very many honest people to initiate the world on a path to a higher vibration and love. I feel there are many people desireous for something like that,...even if they had to let go of a few beliefs.

 

Ever see a fireman or anyone rush into a flaming car to rescue someone? I think humanity is ready for a quantum leap beyond the mental viruses that maintain suffering, dispair, disconnectedness, etc.

 

Remember,..."love waits only on welcome." Yes,...welcome is a HUGE step,...but do-able this very year.

 

V

 

Well, that would be splendid.

[Aaron]

1. I certainly do not speak for Buddhists, which are as varied kinds of pizza.

 

2. Your position on the Abrahamic religions is understandable, and to others mine is obviously misunderstand. Of course, for those who has spent at least a tenth of the academic research on the atrocities of the Abrahamic religions which permeate today's society, there is usually a different viewpoint regarding my intolerance.

 

3. The Bodhisattva oath is quite simple,...the wish to bring about the liberation of all sentient beings. Of course, sentient beings do not believe they need liberation. So how does a fully compassionate bodhisattva fulfill her oath. I say her, because, not only is bodhi a feminine noun, but I personally see all bodhisattvas as feminine.

 

First,...one needs to understand compassion,...and in Buddhism, that is accessed by understanding that form is empty, and empty is form,...or, in other words, understanding Who's who in Duality.

 

Chögyam Trungpa said, “Compassion is not so much feeling sorry for somebody, feeling that you are in a better place and somebody is in a worse place. Compassion is not having any hesitation to reflect your light on things. As light has no hesitation, no inhibition about reflecting on things, it does not discriminate whether to reflect on a pile of shit or on a pile of rock or on a pile of diamonds. It reflects on everything it faces.”

 

Real Compassion doesn't avoid, appease, or nurture beliefs,...it shines light on everything. Real compassion is righteously intolerant of anything that steps between people that their direct experience.

 

What did HH Dalai Lama say about Bin Laden's assassination?

 

"Forgiveness doesn't mean forget what happened. ... If something is serious and it is necessary to take counter-measures, you have to take counter-measures. In fact, one of the precepts of the Bodhisattva vows is to take strong countermeasures when the situation calls for it. If a Bodhisattva doesn't take strong countermeasures when the situation requires, then that constitutes an infraction of one of the vows." HH Dalai Lama

 

The point is,...I certainly don't speak for Buddhists,...and my dearest wish is that you don't think you are either.

V

 

The Dalai Lama is a politically correct Lama and thus not the best source for what you're talking about. Forgiveness actually means to not hold enmity for someone for something they did. I agree that if someone is threatening someone else, then you need to eliminate that threat, but you're talking about intellectual genocide essentially, eliminating any philosophy that opposes your own and that's just not something I feel comfortable with. There are many movements that started peacefully under that pretext, only to end in blood shed. I'm sure that you think that you're above that, so I wont warn you in that regard. Time is the ultimate teacher and in time you will see that nothing you're talking about will come to pass, at least not for many, many, many, generations. When it does happen, I feel great sorrow for the world, for when everyone in the world sees beautiful as beautiful, that is an ugly thing.

 

The best moto for the world would be, "Be done with love." It is only when we are done with love that we can ultimately be done with hate. Semantics are a bitch.

 

Aaron

[3bob]

Here are some Ideas I have been toying with.

 

These musings are in part because I love the Interfaith movement, and believe that understanding the base stances of the different traditions can lead us towards understanding the nature, the strengths and weaknesses of each tradition. These musings are towards the Mystical aspects of traditions, not the exoteric seat warmers who have words and belief only.

 

I am hoping to develop a 'Meta Paradigm' that is capable of respecting, including and understanding all the paradigms within it, giving practitioners of a particular tradition a door way to Interact with people of other, seemingly antagonistic or diametrically opposed traditions, in a healthy way.

 

What do you all think?

 

Now before I start, It should be fairly obvious that while some traditions may just have one kind of teaching, Others may have elements of two or even all three within its body of knowledge.

Also I am not commenting on the conclusions different traditions reach about their experiences but on the actual experiences themselves which are 'Real' for the mystic.

 

So here goes. Object, Subject, and Beyond.

 

'Object' Teachings:

These are any teachings about 'actual' things or any internal or external phenomenal experience. Energetics, Intent and Magick, Most Shamanism, Most Theistic traditions.

Any teaching that approaches the Divine as a 'Force' that can be felt or related with, followed, intuited.

For Instance in Theistic Paths, one practices Intuiting the light and presence of God, and attempts to constantly be connected to that energetic presence. Through constant prayer and surrender ones nature becomes more and more transformed into what one is focusing on. The Theistic mystics are often Powerful healers who can tangibly channel the light and perform 'miracles' on a regular basis. Master Choi Cok Sui was a great recent example of this path.

This Intense focus also brings around a Oneness experience that is Non Dual in nature and Extremely powerful [fire works wise] compared to the gentler Nondual states brought round by the 'Subject' teachings.

Shamanism, also has a grand tradition of entering into a deeply connected, reciprocal relationship with the 'Felt' forces of Nature, and also a powerful Devotion to the creative spirit/Light, behind everything.

 

I Find it Interesting that these paths often actively encourage 'grasping' as a successful sadhana for attaining the union they seek.

 

Also, for people who view through the lense of the 'Object' teachings, divinity is nearly always seen/experienced as Interactive or communicative or Intelligent in some way.

 

Any teachings about a Soul or Spirit as things that can be experienced also fit in here.

These too are real experiences. Across many traditions, you find detailed sets of teaching on the soul, as a minute point of golden light/awareness that lives in the Heart center, in the right ventricle of our actual heart, and is the 'Root' of our being. Many years ago I had the privileged to spend 3 whole days as this point. This experience made it very hard for me to accept 'No self' initially, but It all fit together in the end.

 

Astral projection, soul retrieval, and any similar phenomena obviously fit here as well.

 

'Subject' Teachings:

Here we have a bunch of the Non Dual schools, and a bunch of meditation systems.

These Traditions usually aim to Free the subjective element, Often labeled 'Awareness'

from identification with all the 'Objects' or the content of experience. One spends hours and hours looking for Awareness, until one realizes that It can not be caught, experienced or observed in any way. The only real thing we can say about it is that it 'experiences' things. So Awareness often gets labeled 'the Self'.

 

Some of these traditions go a bit further and look to see that even though awareness can not be pinned down, It also can not be separated from what it is experiencing. Where is the line? Where does awareness stop and the observed 'object' begin? This again leads to oneness experiences, or Nonduality of subject and object, Nonduality of Seer and seen.

Thus everything becomes the Self or Awareness.

 

This gives rise to a gentle but potent sense of Being and peace as the foundation of everything.

 

An Interesting point to me, is that as these path's do not usually treat Divinity or awareness as an 'object' within space and time, they only usually experience Divinity as an Incredibly vast Beingness and presence, without any Interactive element.

 

To me this suggests that the filters we view Divinity through, seriously Impact the way we experience mystical states. I think it is probably Impossible to prove that one View is more correct or more right than any other view. Traditions have spent thousands of years trying and still have not convinced each other.

 

What is true, is that each of these varying experiences is real to the experiencer, and has profound life changing results, Not to mention the Inner psychological revolution that they bring about.

 

'Beyond' Teachings:

 

Now we get to the 'Beyond' part.

As far as I understand, Buddhism is the only tradition that has most of its emphasis here. Buddha objected outright to any teaching that makes a 'self' or 'Consciousness' into a permanent source or unchanging core to our experience of our selves or our world.

To counter these 'false' teachings he gave the Teachings on Emptiness and dependent origination, and Anatta, or No self.

 

Emptiness and Dependent Origination [E&DO] means that Nothing in phenomenal existence, or awareness itself, has an Inherent self existing nature.

In other words it is 'empty' of any form of ultimate reality. Obviously things exist still but only in a relative manner. Things exist only as a result of countless other conditions that pooled together bring about our present conditions.

The same goes for our 'self'. Buddha contended that there is no self, not in any ultimate fixed or eternally unchanging sense. Even awareness is seen as being tied within the cycle of suffering and is one of the aggregates. To counter Awareness teachings that claim Awareness is 'One' thing he pointed out that if one looks closely, one see's that there are 6 different awareness's. Visual, aural, touch, smell, taste, and mental {which includes emotions and psychic phenomena}

 

To Buddha, if you said 'I am awareness' [even if it was true] That would cause a deep subtle area within your mind to grasp or cling to that as a concept.

Grasping is never good In Buddhism. It is a subtle stress, and It causes us to start creating a false sense of self that needs to be protected and defended, and which then ties us back into the cycle of suffering.

 

So in Buddhism one slowly gives up all claims of being anything, and relinquishes all belief in anything being anything other than relatively real.

As all that attachment dissipates, One finds oneself absolutely Free and clear, no clinging, no grasping and the world holds Zero power over you any more.

Its kind of like a neat side step out of everything, into freedom. Amazing.

 

So the Buddhist Enlightenment is a realization about the nature of experience, and is not the Attainment of some 'existing' state, as is enlightenment in 'Object' and 'Subject' schools.

 

Non duality in Buddhism it should be noted, is also not the Oneness of 'seer and seen'

which gets called the Nonduality of extremes {the extremes being 'seer and seen'} but is actually better stated as a middle way {between the extremes of seer and seen} non duality where there is just arising experience.

Zen Master Dogen put it along the lines of "Seeing, no seer. Thinking, no thinker..."

 

Kabbalah has some 'Beyond' teachings and so do some Sufi sects, but I am not familiar enough to do them any justice here.

 

:lol:

 

So those are my three Divisions. They are obviously arbitrary, but does anyone find them useful? I actually think all these ways of viewing have merit, and have no particularly strong bias towards one over the others. I do also obviously Love the 'beyond' teachings, and have found that for myself they set a fantastic context for exploring 'Object' and 'subject' teachings. I have no problem for Instance entering deep communion with the universe in an Interactive manner [object style] through prayer and Intuitive focus, To allow the light to move through me, [this is deeply beneficial to me and my system] but I have no problem understanding that while spirit is always there it is also Dependently originated.

 

In the past I would experience the 'Self' or Oneness, and that would be fantastic, but some part of me would cling to it. Eventually the state would pass, the bliss would subside, and I would be left in depression wanting it back. Now Thanks to 'Beyond' teachings I do not hang on to such states or bliss. They are free to come and go, without me having a need to make them 'mine' {or Me lol}.

 

Seth Ananda.

 

"Buddhism" is very unwise to make any conclusions concerning "Hinduism" (and vice versa) Go in Peace.

 

"...VII Turiya is not that which is conscious of the inner (subjective) world, nor that which is conscious of the outer (objective) world, nor that which is conscious of both, nor that which is a mass of consciousness. It is not simple consciousness nor is It unconsciousness. It is unperceived, unrelated, incomprehensible, uninferable, unthinkable and indescribable. The (or this) essence of the Consciousness manifesting as the self in the three states, (It) is the cessation of all phenomena; It is all peace, all bliss and non—dual. This is what is known as the Fourth (Turiya). This is Atman and this has to be realized..."

 

Om

[Vajrahridaya]

[3bob]

That would merely be the reification of what the Buddha called the 8th jhana of neither perception nor non-perception.

 

The insight of dependent origination doesn't reify any state, transcendent or otherwise as the "self" of an individual, or a "Self" of all. The theory you've stated above, as relating to the samadhi of neither perception nor non-perception would be revolving around a cosmology of independent origination.

 

This is basically calling a state realized deep within the Alayavijnana as the absolute truth. This experience is very, very powerful, and it's very natural for the mind to cling to this state as a "self". I know I did when I first experienced the Turiya state. I was as well deluded by this incredible feeling of freedom and bliss. This state of transcendence found in meditation. There are endless Buddhist Masters of antiquity who grew up very familiar with the Hindu texts of very many types, and understood on an experiential level their import, but also saw through these theories via the insight of dependent origination, thus they wrote many texts stating their limits after coming to Buddhism.

 

endless, repetitive, presumptive, hypnotically automatic and predictable conclusions related to mental concepts from VJ, what else is new?

[Birch]

Yes! To be served up as an Intergalactic fast food delicacy!

 

Damn it, no we all have to be nice... Argh!

 

"we all have to be nice..."

 

Do we?

 

Isn't this 'being nice' thing precisely one of the things that's slowing down a necessary revolution? I'll bet Lustiger is laughing up his sleeve.

 

Can't we be nice and be a44-kicking with this? I'm not advocating violence of any kind (or anything that would result in such) but come on, you're saying a bunch of MMA wizard/shaman 5E experts can't figure this out?

[Vajrahridaya]

endless, repetitive, presumptive, hypnotically automatic and predictable conclusions related to mental concepts from VJ, what else is new?

 

Well, actually it's what Buddhism teaches, from the Buddha to the Dalai Lama concerning the "mystics" excuses for theistic clinging, or for monistic idealism. This is why Sankaracharia spent so much time debating against Buddhism, because Buddhism doesn't accept the view you've stated above as true.

 

Even the "self" in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra is a "self" arising dependent upon the intuitive realization that is insight into dependent origination.

 

My reply's come directly from the heart of my direct experience my friend. It's not mere conceptual conditioning.

[Seth Ananda]

This is why Sankaracharia spent so much time debating against Buddhism, because Buddhism doesn't accept the view you've stated above as true.

 

Booyah! lol

[3bob]

Well, actually it's what Buddhism teaches, from the Buddha to the Dalai Lama concerning the "mystics" excuses for theistic clinging, or for monistic idealism. This is why Sankaracharia spent so much time debating against Buddhism, because Buddhism doesn't accept the view you've stated above as true.

 

Even the "self" in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra is a "self" arising dependent upon the intuitive realization that is insight into dependent origination.

 

My reply's come directly from the heart of my direct experience my friend. It's not mere conceptual conditioning.

 

I don't care what a "Buddhism" of your version or the version of any other cultish sect "accepts" you crazy, robotically talking head. Your repeated discounting of other paths in making comparisons to a "holier than thou" account of Buddhism is deplorable and sickening... Btw big numbskull, I suggest you quit bragging about all of your holier than thou experiences going all way back to when you were just a little numbskull.

 

go in peace

[Vmarco]

I don't care what a "Buddhism" of your version or the version of any other cultish sect "accepts" ....repeated discounting of other paths in making comparisons to a "holier than thou" account of Buddhism is deplorable and sickening...

 

In my opinion there are many so-called cultish Buddhists sects, I personally see Theraveda, the largest Buddhist sect as one. However, not all Buddhists belong to a religious path,...keep in mind, that religion is "a set of beliefs."

 

Shakyamuni Buddha may have been the first to define freethought when he said in the Kalama Sutra, "Do not accept anything by mere tradition. . . Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures. . . Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your preconceived notions." Buddha taught irreligion.

 

This Freethought Buddhism,...that is,Buddhism unrestrained by difference to authority, tradition or established beliefs is often called the Short Path.

 

http://wisdomsgolden.../notebooks/23/1

 

The Short Path doesn't discount all other Paths, but simply calls them what they are, Long Paths. Authentic Vajrayana Buddhism is a Short Path. Gurdjieff's (not Ouspensky's) 'Fourth Way' is a Short Path. Freethought Buddhism is a Short Path.

 

A Short Path is a path to awakening in a fraction of a single lifetime. That surely will upset 'savior' and 'book' cults, etc.,...but then Savior and Book cults are not so interested in things like Unborn Awareness,...their paths allow them to take their conditions along with them. The Short Path feels that to enter the Unconditional, one must be Unconditional,...that is, through their Unconditioned Awareness. Does that make Vajrayana more "holier" than other paths,...absolutely not,...because Freethought Buddhism is directly opposite of any definition of "holy."

 

The word "holy" arises from the Savior and Book religions,...it is somewhat a fascist construct, and has no place in the Short Path, except as a belief hinderence to be let go of.

http://barsalona.es/...tics-of-fascism

 

V

[lifeforce]

Once again, Buddhist superiority reigns supreme, while denouncing all other valid paths.

Dependent origination this... emptiness that... no self.....no mind... blah blah blah.

Your right 3bob, it's robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating the forums.

[Vmarco]

Once again, Buddhist superiority reigns supreme, while denouncing all other valid paths.

Dependent origination this... emptiness that... no self.....no mind... blah blah blah.

Your right 3bob, it's robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating the forums.

 

Curious,...what makes a path valid? Christianity is a valid path for what? Theraveda is a valid path for what? Sufism is a valid path for what? Perhaps they're all valid for what that path leads to.

 

Theraveda Buddhism might be into "no self.....no mind... blah blah blah" but certainly not all Buddhism. Short Path or Freethought Buddhism is about the Permanent Self (mahaparinirvana sutra), the Heart-Mind (bodhicitta), and bliss, bliss, bliss.

 

To me, "robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating" would all be belief systems,...which are also useless.

 

Thus I ask myself,...what would someone called Lifeforce be interested in? It can't be "robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating"....a Lifeforce would share some compelling, interesting stories and insights, stories beyond belief and boredom.

 

Looking forward to reading some.

 

V

[tragblack]

Personally, I have a very weird feeling about the current Dalai Lama.

[Birch]

Once again, Buddhist superiority reigns supreme, while denouncing all other valid paths.

Dependent origination this... emptiness that... no self.....no mind... blah blah blah.

Your right 3bob, it's robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating the forums.

 

I had a dream about just this the other day. Basically the message was that everyone who had ever done what I'd done on the 'path' I'd followed got the same result. Methinks this is why it's called 'lineage'. Still, it is pretty interesting, I think (oh rats, not supposed to that apparently )

[Birch]

I don't care what a "Buddhism" of your version or the version of any other cultish sect "accepts" you crazy, robotically talking head. Your repeated discounting of other paths in making comparisons to a "holier than thou" account of Buddhism is deplorable and sickening... Btw big numbskull, I suggest you quit bragging about all of your holier than thou experiences going all way back to when you were just a little numbskull.

 

go in peace

 

"go in peace"

 

Doesn't sound like it to me. Why can't one just say what one means? Unless you actually did mean it, in which case, my bad

[3bob]

In my opinion there are many so-called cultish Buddhists sects, I personally see Theraveda, the largest Buddhist sect as one. However, not all Buddhists belong to a religious path,...keep in mind, that religion is "a set of beliefs."

 

Shakyamuni Buddha may have been the first to define freethought when he said in the Kalama Sutra, “Do not accept anything by mere tradition. . . Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures. . . Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your preconceived notions.” Buddha taught irreligion.

 

This Freethought Buddhism,...that is,Buddhism unrestrained by difference to authority, tradition or established beliefs is often called the Short Path.

 

http://wisdomsgolden.../notebooks/23/1

 

The Short Path doesn't discount all other Paths, but simply calls them what they are, Long Paths. Authentic Vajrayana Buddhism is a Short Path. Gurdjieff's (not Ouspensky's) 'Fourth Way' is a Short Path. Freethought Buddhism is a Short Path.

 

A Short Path is a path to awakening in a fraction of a single lifetime. That surely will upset 'savior' and 'book' cults, etc.,...but then Savior and Book cults are not so interested in things like Unborn Awareness,...their paths allow them to take their conditions along with them. The Short Path feels that to enter the Unconditional, one must be Unconditional,...that is, through their Unconditioned Awareness. Does that make Vajrayana more "holier" than other paths,...absolutely not,...because Freethought Buddhism is directly opposite of any definition of "holy."

 

The word "holy" arises from the Savior and Book religions,...it is somewhat a fascist construct, and has no place in the Short Path, except as a belief hinderence to be let go of.

http://barsalona.es/...tics-of-fascism

 

V

 

Just to be clear I'm in no way against any Buddhist sects, Buddhists or related vehicles so to speak that follow the very noble "noble eight fold path" which the Buddha taught. Also to be clear I'm in no way for the destruction or discounting of such vehicles.

 

What is "long' or "short" is just more stuff or material for humans to argue about. The Spirit works regardless... throwing the baby out with the bath water does not.

 

Btw, there happen to be some "fourth way groups" that are seriously sick cults. Yep, Mr. G. you left a hell of a mess.

[3bob]

"go in peace"

 

Doesn't sound like it to me. Why can't one just say what one means? Unless you actually did mean it, in which case, my bad

 

The first paragraph is about conflict of pov's and the "world",

the last sentence stands regardless of conflict in pov's or the world.

[3bob]

Once again, Buddhist superiority reigns supreme, while denouncing all other valid paths.

Dependent origination this... emptiness that... no self.....no mind... blah blah blah.

Your right 3bob, it's robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating the forums.

 

"it's robotic, boring, repetitive and suffocating the forums" Well not in all cases nor does it have to be that way or only get stuck with that assesment imo. For instance I love to hear of the stories of various students, masters and saints related to Buddhism, especially Zen.

[Seth Ananda]

I don't care what a "Buddhism" of your version or the version of any other cultish sect "accepts" you crazy, robotically talking head. Your repeated discounting of other paths in making comparisons to a "holier than thou" account of Buddhism is deplorable and sickening... Btw big numbskull, I suggest you quit bragging about all of your holier than thou experiences going all way back to when you were just a little numbskull.

 

go in peace

I do not think he is discounting all other paths, and I think you are just pissed off that he is proving his point with facts like:

 

Buddha himself rejected all other paths as falling into eternalism, and that shankacharaya spent half his life arguing against the Buddhists, for denying a true self.

 

Thats the two main proponents of both sides agreeing that there is a difference. Pointing that out does not constitute

Your repeated discounting of other paths in making comparisons to a "holier than thou" account of Buddhism is deplorable and sickening...

 

You want them to be saying the same thing, because you have beliefs from the Hindu path, and If they say the same thing [about Ultimate reality] then you and your beliefs are safe.

But... If they do not say the same thing, then 'danger!' It means you could be wrong about your path leading to the Ultimate...! That causes a sense of uncertainty that you are not fond of.

 

I personally do not know as I have not reached Ultimate Wisdom, and I think it entirely possible that the Hindu's may be right, But it seems logical to me on my path, that even if there is a True Self as awareness, to Label it 'My self' would cause me to create attachments to it, on a deep mind level. I would rather let it be without fixating on it [at this point in my path] and For me there is a logic and beauty to E&DO teachings.

[Vajrahridaya]

Personally, I have a very weird feeling about the current Dalai Lama.

 

I did too, until I got transmission from ChNNR, then that weird feeling was replaced by recognition.

 

Weird is generally a word denoting something not yet understood, so it makes one feel discomfort from within this state of mystery, or... "weirdness".

 

Remember that witch burnings were done from the very same state of, "weird."

[Vajrahridaya]

Buddhism is about the Permanent Self (mahaparinirvana sutra)

 

There is not a single permanent Self of all. This is not what the mahaparinirvana sutra is talking about. It's not talking about merging with an all encompassing light. The self of a Buddha arises as permanent due to a permanent intuitive insight into the emptiness of awareness and phenomena. It's basically the constant recognition that makes one a anuttarasamyaksambuddha, and that state of realization is the permanent self of a Buddha.

[Seth Ananda]

There is not a single permanent Self of all. This is not what the mahaparinirvana sutra is talking about. It's not talking about merging with an all encompassing light. The self of a Buddha arises as permanent due to a permanent intuitive insight into the emptiness of awareness and phenomena. It's basically the constant recognition that makes one a anuttarasamyaksambuddha, and that state of realization is the permanent self of a Buddha.

 

Yes there is stuff that sounds as if it is talking about True Self but is not.

 

Longchenpa for Instance says things like, 'rest in your essential Nature' which at face value could look like a True self teaching. But as you read a bit further he clearly describes this 'essential Nature' as being Empty and Dependently Originating...