Any recomended concentration meditation?

[Aetherous]

(12:45:11 AM) me: you deserve it with how you've been acting

(12:45:20 AM) Scotty: really?

(12:45:23 AM) me: you shut people down and talk down to people when you disagree with them

(12:45:33 AM) Scotty: so?

 

Sunya, this is exactly why I don't want our private converation made public. You are just trying to make me look bad...and it will work!

 

For a more truthful perspective on the quote right here: this was my response while in the midst of taking an online quiz that's due tomorrow morning! After being verbally assaulted by you...it's an example of me not having patience.

 

By the way, I didn't give permission for you to post that part of our private conversation either. Please don't post more private stuff again. And maybe we should stop referring to it, as well? It's only problematic.

[Seth Ananda]

I can see how some people would look at it like that. My actions in this thread have not been skillful at all!

Neither have mine.

 

 

I didn't say that. That was Sunya misunderstanding and misquoting me from our private discussions, in which I schooled him.

I was refering to your public conversations.

 

He was arguing that emptiness means nothing has self existence (for instance, he was saying that a tree doesn't exist...only appearances of characteristics of a tree exist, there is no tree that enables the characteristics to appear), and that nothing exists separate from anything else, ever...in addition to other false concepts, such as the world not existing when he's not aware of it, etc...these ideas are misunderstandings of the actual Buddhist teaching of emptiness. This is why I say I schooled him.

Then it is he who schooled you. His stance is what Buddhism teaches, at least Tibetan Buddhism...

 

The body going without food or air for a period of time was an example of how it can be separated from essentially everything and still exist. Sunya was confusing "dependent origination" with a false notion of...I suppose, "dependence". A theory (which I guess he made up?) that everything constantly depends on everything else to continue existing. He was trying to convince me that all Buddhists believe these things...I had to quote wikipedia a few times to show him the truth of his own religion.

Once again he was right, at least by Tibetan Buddhist standards. That example just does not work. The Arm you mention was already dependent on other causes [the food that helped it grow, the genetice of the mother and father that shaped it] and just because you somehow create a circumstance where it seems free of other influences, it is still just seemingly free. It is still dependent on the space time continium it seems to exist in, and is dependent on you having put it in its 'free' condition... So again you were getting schooled without knowing it.

 

 

Like I made plainly clear, I'm not anti-Buddhist. I'm pro-real-Buddhist! I'm anti-pseudo-Buddhist. The practitioners here need to shape up! I only consider a few to be real Buddhists. For example, your posts supposedly defending Buddhism in this topic have been ridiculous and actually very un-Buddhist! You didn't address any of the actual points I made...you simply attacked me.

 

We could have discussed what Buddhist enlightenment is and isn't...what Taoist alchemy schools I was referring to. We could find out if what I said is really legitimate. You know...have a discussion!

 

So anyone who does not swallow your incomplete understanding is a pseudo Buddhist?

And I am happy to discuss what Buddhist enlightenment is or Isn't, but you it seems are not. When simple jack gave you an excellent reply on that very subject, you did not discuss, but rather made assumptions about his lack of actual practice. How was that in any way helpful, or in any way not an attack?

 

Defending Buddhism is un Buddhist? What about the Dharma protectors? If we just allowed people to spew distorted teachings the teachings would degenerate and real Buddhism would eventually become lost. Hence Debate being a great tradition historically.

 

I am Happy to Debate, but you were not debating. You were getting Nasty, and I do not have to stand for that.

I have not perfected patience.

Are you saying that a Buddhist who is not a door mat is not really a Buddhist?

 

Nah...instead you just want to defame me personally. The truth doesn't matter to the pseudo-Buddhists here.

No. As I have shown, everyone was being nice here till you started telling people to shut up. Don't play victim. You are a snake in the grass, striking when you can, but shouting 'Poor Me' when someone hits you with a stick.

Re read this thread. You started this. Poor Diddums, you got a reaction out of the evil Buddhists.

 

 

Facts don't matter. If Taoism is better than Buddhism, that's irrelevant to you types...even discussing the possibility is irrelevant...because the unconscious reaction is that "Buddhism" must be defended at all costs! NOTHING CAN BE CONSIDERED BETTER THAN IT! NO ONE CAN HOLD THAT OPINION!!!! IF THEY DO THEY'RE HATE FILLED IDIOTS!!! Buddhism is defended no matter what by the fakers. Even at the cost of hurting someone personally (me) and breaking forum rules, getting yourself banned (which clearly should happen at this point).

I dont fit this category. I love Buddhism, but I am open to other truths.

 

Once again you allude to yourself as an innocent bystander. Audience, please re read this thread. Scotty speaks for himself as the original antagonist.

 

So yeah, I'm just disappointed in you pseudo-Buddhists here, and continue to feel that way more and more, the more I interact with you guys. I would love to see more of the real deal being represented here. I wish you guys could step up to the plate and do it...even something as simple and basic as "right action".

Does right action mean just lying down and taking it from an ass like you? Well I am not that developed yet.

 

But until that happens, I will continue to publicly claim the truth as I see it regarding the way that you and the others here treat your own tradition. Deal. With. It.

You dont have the capacity to know truth.

 

That was shown the first time someone disagreed with you and you attacked them, claiming they needed get some actual practice. lol.

 

Now as for my Issues: I am Intensely Loyal. I have a problem with that. When I was a teenager, I could take all kinds of Insults but the second someone started on my friends, I would break their nose and punch them till they were unconscious. If I had to pull off a fence post or throw a bottle to do it I would. I gained quite a reputation for it.

I have relaxed alot over the years but when I see someone start on my friends I still fly off the handle. I do not know why. Maybe because I had no friends in primary school. It is an Issue I still need to work on. hopefully I can work on it in what ever cooling off period I get served...

 

Seth.

[Sunya]

He was arguing that emptiness means nothing has self existence (for instance, he was saying that a tree doesn't exist...only appearances of characteristics of a tree exist, there is no tree that enables the characteristics to appear), and that nothing exists separate from anything else, ever...in addition to other false concepts, such as the world not existing when he's not aware of it, etc...these ideas are misunderstandings of the actual Buddhist teaching of emptiness. This is why I say I schooled him.

 

This is not a misunderstanding. This is what emptiness means in Buddhism. Nothing exists separate from anything else because there is no-thing. "Thingness" is a concept, a mental label which possesses a false assumption that there is something out there with an enduring identity, some essential core, and causes this 'thing' to be. It's like you think there is some actual thing there called a 'tree' but there isn't. Various causal processes give rise to characteristics of 'tree.' These processes are also intertwined with whatever gives rise to other 'things' near the tree, like other trees, the leaves, water, the dirt, the air, the sky, the animals. It's all interconnected, and this makes everything empty of self-existence.

 

Since you believe I am the one misunderstanding, I will quote the Dalai Lama.

 

 

One of the most important philosophical insights in Buddhism comes from what is known as the theory of emptiness. At its heart is the deep recognition that there is a fundamental disparity between the way we perceive the world, including our own experience in it, and the way things actually are.

 

In our day-to-day experience, we tend to relate to the world and to ourselves as if these entities possessed self-enclosed, definable, discrete and enduring reality. For instance, if we examine our own conception of selfhood, we will find that we tend to believe in the presence of an essential core to our being, which characterises our individuality and identity as a discrete ego, independent of the physical and mental elements that constitute our existence.

 

The philosophy of emptiness reveals that this is not only a fundamental error but also the basis for attachment, clinging and the development of our numerous prejudices. According to the theory of emptiness, any belief in an objective reality grounded in the assumption of intrinsic, independent existence is simply untenable. All things and events, whether ‘material’, mental or even abstract concepts like time, are devoid of objective, independent existence.

 

To intrinsically possess such independent existence would imply that all things and events are somehow complete unto themselves and are therefore entirely self-contained. This would mean that nothing has the capacity to interact with or exert influence on any other phenomena. But we know that there is cause and effect – turn a key in a car, the starter motor turns the engine over, spark plugs ignite and fuel begins to burn… Yet in a universe of self-contained, inherently existing things, these events could never occur!

 

So effectively, the notion of intrinsic existence is incompatible with causation; this is because causation implies contingency and dependence, while anything that inherently existed would be immutable and self-enclosed. In the theory of emptiness, everything is argued as merely being composed of dependently related events; of continuously interacting phenomena with no fixed, immutable essence, which are themselves in dynamic and constantly changing relations. Thus, things and events are 'empty' in that they can never possess any immutable essence, intrinsic reality or absolute ‘being’ that affords independence.

 

 

 

The body going without food or air for a period of time was an example of how it can be separated from essentially everything and still exist. Sunya was confusing "dependent origination" with a false notion of...I suppose, "dependence". A theory (which I guess he made up?) that everything constantly depends on everything else to continue existing. He was trying to convince me that all Buddhists believe these things...I had to quote wikipedia a few times to show him the truth of his own religion.

 

Like I told you in our private discussion, just because the 'body' can exist without air for a period of time doesn't mean that it's independent. Temporary independence doesn't mean permanent independence. Even in that temporary state of not having air or food, the body is living off of stored nutrients from the environment. Even if it weren't, the 'body' is not an independent thing at all but rather consists of complex processes working together. "Body" then is a concept for these complex processes, so there is no such thing as "body" separate from these processes. The body is empty of inherent existence in this way. Not just because these complex processes are interdependent with the energies of the world, but also because there is no such thing as a body separate from these complex everchanging processes.

 

Again, not a misunderstanding. This is just Buddhist philosophy. Even though wikipedia is a crappy source, there's nothing there that contradicts this.

 

Scott, It's fine for you to disagree, which you clearly do, but it's rather ridiculous to claim that I don't understand Buddhism and that you "schooled" me. Lay off the pride a bit. You lack understanding of Buddhism and therefore have no right to make claims about what Buddhist enlightenment is and isn't.

 

Him and I have spoken privately for a while now, and I'm quite aware of his practice habits. He can claim it's true, but I simply don't believe him. At all!

 

I did lower dantien breathing for a year maybe 5 years ago. This was before I knew you. We've known each other for about 2 years.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Sunya

[Seth Ananda]

[Aetherous]

I am not guilty of breaking the forum's rules whatsoever, and should not be banned along with you, Seth.

 

I hope you can work out your issues of violence while you're gone...and at this point, since you are continuing with the personal insults and aggression, I do hope you are banned for quite a while.

 

I disagree with both you and Sunya regarding the basic beliefs of Buddhism. I do agree with wikipedia, though...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunyata

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependent_origination

 

Funny how that works.

[C T]

Went to bed at about 3am this morning, and awoke at 5.30am to go for a morning walk. Nice.... its quite breezy here, so i had to walk a bit more brisk than usual ~ enjoyable nonetheless. At some point during the stroll, i did become mindful of how the mods are sometimes put into very dicey situations which require a high degree of astuteness and patience, and i thanked the stars we have some wonderful individuals here who have the big heart to volunteer their precious time to get things running as smoothly as possible so that we pseudo-Buddhists can continue to strut our pseudo creeds while grouping up to go hunting for Taoist militants and bash them over their heads with our pseudo-illusionistic clubs made of pseudo-buddhist plasticky stuff.

(reflecting on the situation at hand, it might be worth seriously considering a sub-forum for the pseudo-Buddhists?)

 

Its almost 7.30 now, and i am about to start my pseudo Buddhist practice, beginning with aspirational, wish-granting prayers for the benefit of all beings, so i was wondering if anyone here would like for me to intercede on their behalf to pray for the blessings of mercy, grace, compassion, equanimity, peace, good health, long life, freedom, joy and love?

(Disclaimer ~ semi-pseudo-authentic intercessor, so you might or might not get the benefits... )

 

How about you, Scotty? It may not be so real as to meet your discerning standards, but i have been told that God loves a trier, so hey, even if it aint half hot, at. least. its. lukewarm....

 

O btw, i have been inspired by Scotty's admonishing reminder that we should do more practices first, before we are qualified enough to engage in discussion with him. Which is why i have not responded to any of his mistaken views with any of my mistaken views, since i think i do not spend enough time on practice.

 

Thanks for the wake-up call, brah.

Edited September 6, 2011 by CowTao

[Sunya]

I disagree with both you and Sunya regarding the basic beliefs of Buddhism. I do agree with wikipedia, though...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunyata

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependent_origination

 

Funny how that works.

 

Neither of those articles reject what I posted above or in our private conversations. Actually that quote I posted from the Dalai Lama is from the Sunyata wiki page.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Sunya

[NeiChuan]

It may not of been a simple disagreement, but a blanket statement made against all meditation methods (see below in bold); this kind of comment is not really helpful towards an understanding that there are MANY methods and there is no need to setup superior of one vs another. In the end, the person finds which one they really connect to and get something out of. Hopefully there is acceptance that there is enough variation in the world of meditation to provide everyone a chance to see what works for them. It is great to hear what works for certain people but it does not mean it must work for another; that is their own journey.

 

Hm, I guess if it offends people.

 

But in all honesty, what he said doesn't concern me. So I don't very much care what he had to say right there. I was just mentioning if it was so carelessly thrown into his post, and there lies the problem. Perhaps peoples emotions shouldn't be thrown so carelessly in response.

[Aetherous]

CowTao,

 

Why are you thinking I called you a pseudo-Buddhist? You were actually one of the few that I was reserving some respect for...past tense, now.

 

Why is telling someone to practice more and to stop parroting supposed authority figures a bad thing? It will only benefit them, as well as the quality of the discussion on this forum.

 

Sunya,

 

Dude, I've been over this soooooo many times with you now. I answer your quesitons, and you ignore it and ask them again and again, or just claim I'm wrong, etc. I can't do it anymore, man. I totally lack the patience to deal with that.

 

But you are improving...your previous post was fairly decent and I could agree with most of it. So the debate is beneficial in some ways...for you.

[Seth Ananda]

I am not guilty of breaking the forum's rules whatsoever, and should not be banned along with you, Seth.

 

I hope you can work out your issues of violence while you're gone...and at this point, since you are continuing with the personal insults and aggression, I do hope you are banned for quite a while.

 

So you telling chi dragon to shut up and asking mods to ban him for disagreeing with you is not dodgy behaviour?

 

You dont want to see me banned, you want to see me banned for a long time...

Your sick of Buddhist nonsense, You Love buddhists...?!

 

You called Sunya a coward or a hypocrit or something for not showing or admiting how you 'schooled' him in private messages, yet you do not give him permission to show the 'schooling' he recieved!? lol

 

You are deeply Inconsistent. I feel a core Instability within you! ooohhh! lol.

 

A lack of philosophical and ethical back bone, an inability to be honest about your emotions towards us...

 

And just how did you 'win' and 'school' Sunya? Who decided that victory? Are you being completely honest with your self as you accuse him of dishonesty for not admitting your obvious victory?

Did you really win or were you just dishonestly claiming something not yours to appear better than you really are? That would be called lying...

 

Why would you need to publicly brag that you 'schooled' Sunya in a private message, and then insinuate that he was a cowardly hypocrite for not admitting it?

 

Why scotty why?

 

Its a big claim with no evidence, and it definitely insults another member of the board here.

 

Why did you insinuate these things?

 

I want to know your motive's.. do you know why you would feel prompted to say such things?

 

What exactly is the pay off for such dishonesty?

 

 

Me, I merely react when someone hangs shit on my friends...

[Sunya]

Sunya,

 

Dude, I've been over this soooooo many times with you now. I answer your quesitons, and you ignore it and ask them again and again, or just claim I'm wrong, etc. I can't do it anymore, man. I totally lack the patience to deal with that.

 

But you are improving...your previous post was fairly decent and I could agree with most of it. So the debate is beneficial in some ways...for you.

 

You lack the patience? You made a claim that you understand Buddhism and schooled me on it. I'm asking you to back it up. I am making the same arguments that I made in our private discussion, which I will post publicly if you agree. But that won't be necessary if you simply respond to what I posted here. My position hasn't changed.

[C T]

CowTao,

 

Why are you thinking I called you a pseudo-Buddhist? You were actually one of the few that I was reserving some respect for...past tense, now.

 

Why is telling someone to practice more and to stop parroting supposed authority figures a bad thing? It will only benefit them, as well as the quality of the discussion on this forum.

 

Well, my respect for you as an individual has not changed one bit, Scotty. Just because you make blanket statements which starts off with 'You Buddhists' (well, i am Buddhist, and i am a regular poster here, so....) does not mean you are any less deserving of respect as a fellow human being.

 

Sometime ago, we had a little discussion, and we made clear some things, and also, based on some of the values which were evident from some of your posts going back to the time when i first came on the forum, you are still sound in my books, and even if you think that i have sided with some others on this matter hence you no longer wish to respect my position, its okay by me, you are free to make any deductions you deem fits your present consciousness. Certainly i, nor anyone else, can deny your prerogative on whom you want to call friend.

 

I was a bit disappointed by your inaccuracies in some matters relating to Buddhist thought, but then, we cannot hold everyone to account for their lack of understanding.

 

Even though you may be mistaken about some formed ideas you have about Buddhism, it does not change the fact that you are sincerely wishing to grow and become a happier person, as does almost everyone i believe, and in that we can find a common ground to perhaps negotiate some peaceful understanding and empathy?

[Aetherous]

So you telling chi dragon to shut up and asking mods to ban him for disagreeing with you is not dodgy behaviour?

 

ChiDragon has been trolling, posting blatantly false information...and he actually posted racist remarks against westerners and white people specifically a while back. At the very least, 90% of his posts are of this quality. I have been warning him that I'd report him to the mods for this behavior, and so I started early in this thread for a legitimate reason.

 

Not simply because I disagreed with someone.

 

Why scotty why?

 

I see who you are now.

[Mal]

Back from a nice invigorating session of Tai Chi and Kung Fu.

 

and going away again to try to gain some perspective...

 

[Sunya]

The issue with Scotty is that he considers himself enlightened in the Buddhist sense (he told me so in private), which explains why it's only his interpretation of Buddhism that's true since he is a bearer of truth. Of course being a bearer of truth, he feels the need to "school" others. Oh well...

 

Sorry guys for derailing this thread so much, but after Scotty's baseless claims about Buddhism here, I had to point all of this out. Scotty does not practice Buddhism, disagrees with some of the central Buddhist tenets such as no-self, and considers himself a 'despiser of Buddhist beliefs' but strangely also considers himself enlightened in the Buddhist sense making him a Buddha. Not really someone worth listening to in this regard.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Sunya

[Seth Ananda]

I see who you are now.

Ooohhh very mystical! lol.

 

So what about my other questions?

 

What would compel you to brag that you 'schooled' Sunya in a pm that you will not allow us to see, and that you 'won' the conversation but that he is too much of a cowardly hypocrite to admit publicly to his trouncing?

 

Why would you Lie? That is exactly what it is unless you can show us the score chart, that shows us that you did absolutely Beat Sunya in this legendary debate.

 

So That pretty much makes you a convayer of false Information?

 

Again why the need to brag?

 

And when I have hit you with some hard questions, you respond with the very mysterious

I see who you are now.

Nice back peddle.

"hey everyone do not look at my dodgy track record, Look over there, at Seth, he is... ...evil!!!"

 

You know from now on, every thing you say is suspect right? You have alluded to events that did not happen, and tried to make your self appear as some enlightened hero, but, BUSTED!

 

Even worse is putting someone down as being cowardly and hypocritical in connection with False events.

 

That is called Bearing False Witness, or Perjury and is federally punishable. Much worse than Name calling.

 

Seth.

[Sunya]

What would compel you to brag that you 'schooled' Sunya in a pm that you will not allow us to see, and that you 'won' the conversation but that he is too much of a cowardly hypocrite to admit publicly to his trouncing?

 

He told me he doesn't want the conversation to be seen publicly because he doesn't want others to see how rude and belittling he was during the conversation which would make him look bad. He's not a very good debater, gets frustrated easily, and lacks the patience to clearly elucidate his thoughts and understand what I'm trying to say. He masks his frustration with pride and the need to belittle. He's bragging because he needs to be seen as enlightened and a bearer of truth. His pride depends on it. He wants everyone to believe him as an authority when he says things like "Buddhism is inferior," so of course he doesn't want to be seen as someone who has no clue what they're talking about.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Sunya

[johndoe2012]

It seems Taoists historically did not have the culture of debating compared to Buddhists so that may be why people who do qi practises tend to prefer to do more practise than talking - it might have something to do with Chinese culture as well.

 

There are some Taoist sects who have defined enlightenment in their terms which differ from Buddhist awakening in terms of experience, while other sects do not even speak of this issue. So there is not consensus in Taoism regarding that point. Even in Buddhist circles there are still disagreements on the awakening/enlightenment experience (Mahasi vs others and so on) so maybe one shouldn't take it so seriously?

 

It seems more common for high level masters to see the similiarities rather than the differences between the teachings while it is the laymen who see the differences and claim superiority. At this point I still think there are differences.

 

I agree with this

 

The reason though why I have said that meditations that focus solely on the body and its esoteric structures usually cause problems in the long term; is because these sort of meditations that either push or guide the energies along some sort of predetermined pathway, using visualization to spin this or that channel/orbit, etc.: Actually will prevent someone from reaching samadhi, because the nature of these sort of practices entails engaging the sixth consciousness (either through visualization/mental imaging or focusing on the energy and it's sensations. Which in turn is excessively focusing on the body) that you can't "jump out" of this realm or let go of the idea of being this mind/body. To reach dhyana (especially the formless jhana's) requires that someone lets go of these notions altogether. You can't accomplish this (the exception being Tantra because, after generating the visualization to the point of one-pointed concentration; you then are supposed to completely drop it altogether to "empty out" and achieve samadhi) with these sort of meditations because the nature of them is to constantly engage in mental imaging or clinging to the body and the sensations that chi produces.

 

The meditations you speak of seems to me to be more in line with the Mantak Chia stuff and not jing-chi-shen and shen work so I think Taoists would agree to that.

Edited September 6, 2011 by chris d

[Aetherous]

Seth,

 

So what about my other questions?

 

A complete waste of everyone's time. Yours. Mine. Everyone reading this. God's.

 

What would compel you to brag that you 'schooled' Sunya in a pm that you will not allow us to see, and that you 'won' the conversation but that he is too much of a cowardly hypocrite to admit publicly to his trouncing?

 

That is how the private debate went down from my perspective. Sunya disagrees. In the midst of the debate, I was rude and impatient. It was a very long debate, taking many hours of fairly fast conversation on instant messenger, often going in circles around the same issues. It was heated coming from both sides. For these reasons, I know that if anyone here (especially now) were to view the whole thing they wouldn't be able to judge it clearly, and would probably think it's another case of me being...whatever you think I'm being. The points that were made would be overlooked. Buddhist terminology would be clung to, instead of acceptance of plain truth which only seems to contradict the Buddhist view.

 

So I don't trust a single person here to view the thing with clarity.

Why would you Lie? That is exactly what it is unless you can show us the score chart

 

Why would Sunya lie, and make the first strike, claiming I can't comprehend Buddhism...when we simply disagreed? There's also your answer as to why I said I schooled him. I didn't just start talking about this private debate out of the blue. He came in here and defamed me, and said no one should listen to my opinion. I clarified and said that his view of the private discussions is way off, by saying I 'schooled' him. From my perspective, I did. From his (and yours without seeing it), I didn't...and he did. Whatever. It's just perspectives. I'm over it.

 

By the way, he took great offense to this whole thing and called me a BUNCH of shit...and now we are not friends. And by my own choice resulting from the way he responded to me privately, we won't ever be again. I view this as very unfortunate. So thanks, Seth, for perpetuating the hatred. We could just drop it at any time. Perspectives are never the full picture, especially when it comes to individuals who disagree. I know I played a huge role in Sunya defriending me...but we ALL played a big part in making this mess, and it has been unskillful and shameful for each of us...in my opinion, equally.

 

Nice back peddle.

"hey everyone do not look at my dodgy track record, Look over there, at Seth, he is... ...evil!!!"

 

Oh, people can see me and my supposed flaws quite clearly now, Seth. I simply don't see why going back and forth with you here is worthwhile...that's why I barely take any effort to respond. I am very aware that my lack of a response to you and Sunya makes me appear exactly how you portray me to be. An idiot, a backpeddler, someone who is afraid of being seen in a negative light. All that shit is obvious to those who are incapable of taking the time to see through it, and who want to hold me in that light. It happens regardless, so fuck it....I appear that way and see no need to defend against such stupidity.

 

...I do see who you are. Someone who thinks they are loyal, yet is violently reactionary. Someone who will bend the truth to fit their fight (an example of this is your list of questions, which don't portray me in an honest light, but are completely slanted towards the point of view you're trying to build of who I supposedly am). So that's what that meant. It was also an attempt at letting you know I lack the patience to continue and am essentially done with any discussion.

 

What is this, then? I don't know...just responding. I guess a temporary boost of patience power.

 

You know from now on, every thing you say is suspect right? You have alluded to events that did not happen, and tried to make your self appear as some enlightened hero, but, BUSTED!

 

Whatever. Everything I say is suspect...cool. Fine with me.

 

Yeah, I'm enlightened in the Buddhist sense. You aren't? And you call yourself a Buddhist? It's not a big deal. I don't even care if people think nothing of that claim. I obviously don't try to act like an enlightened person! After spending many years on the spiritual path, researching and practicing many traditions, you'd think a person could make some sort of claim. You think it's a lie? I think your attitude is severely lacking personal integrity. Whatever...our perspectives differ and are limited viewpoints of the potential of eachother.

 

Even worse is putting someone down as being cowardly and hypocritical in connection with False events.

 

You still don't know if they are false...and in my view, if you read the private conversation at this point, you won't be able to tell one way or the other. You've already formed your opinion of me and have proven yourself to be unconsciously violent towards those who you think deserve it. You have shown how you are willing to bend the truth to fit your needs.

That is called Bearing False Witness, or Perjury and is federally punishable. Much worse than Name calling.

 

The events as I see it make my statement plainly true. It's simply a perspective that differs from Sunya....why believe either of us regarding something you know nothing about? And nothing I've said is federally punishable...what a fucking joke.

 

Anyway, we are continually discussing a private conversation which will not be viewed publicly for the reasons already mentioned. So say what you wish about this...about my wish to keep it private...about me...it's all just a gigantic waste of time and like I said, I lack the patience to respond to such petty bullshit.

 

It'd be better to focus on practice, and letting go of whatever this is.

 

I admit that I can seem like a super douche bag or whatever. It's not my wish to make myself appear any certain way to those who wish to perpetuate however I'm appearing.

 

My views remain unchanged regarding everything I've said in this thread. I'm continually over it and willing to stop this inanity at any point. You must learn to deal with my point of view on Buddhism, which simply differs from your own. Buddhist enlightenment is the first step in Taoist alchemy. Taoism is superior to Buddhism. I stand by those statements, having experienced it for myself. I feel no need to justify them or clarify my points to those who won't listen. I'm not defaming Buddhism by saying it. I'm not incapable of understanding Buddhism, or a lower level practitioner or anything, because I hold that point of view.

 

So, peace.

[Aetherous]

Chris,

 

It seems Taoists historically did not have the culture of debating compared to Buddhists so that may be why people who do qi practises tend to prefer to do more practise than talking - it might have something to do with Chinese culture as well.

 

There are some Taoist sects who have defined enlightenment in their terms which differ from Buddhist awakening in terms of experience, while other sects do not even speak of this issue. So there is not consensus in Taoism regarding that point. Even in Buddhist circles there are still disagreements on the awakening/enlightenment experience (Mahasi vs others and so on) so maybe one shouldn't take it so seriously?

 

I agree.

 

It seems more common for high level masters to see the similiarities rather than the differences between the teachings while it is the laymen who see the differences and claim superiority. At this point I still think there are differences.

 

This is often assumed to be true, but where are all of these high level masters we're talking about? Are we sure they are high level masters? How are we sure of this?

[realfastcat]

There is a more western type to do concentration practise is to watch a clock seconds passing without thinking and watching things soft and with persistence while fully relaxed and not blurring of the object of concentration.

The blurring is telling you that it is your current limit.

 

The effect is to be able to do "wordly" things with more accuracy and as a pre practise of concentrate on something in the body, energy body, or source or nothingness, which is maybe have accumulated sideeffects because of distraction.

 

I present this as the western average human like to count, analyse and measure ones improvement and growth challenge. Also it cost more energy to concentrate on an "outer" object and develop also energy for maintaining concentration. One also develop a concentration and disallow trance like states and can notice very fast distraction.

 

Well you have to be friendly to yourself since maybe you fail to concentrate 2 sek

while the first is to reach 1 minute, 5 minute 20 minute. 1 hour and then undisrupted

concentration. Take a short break and close your eyes when this blurring comes,

still your selftalk and try again.

 

Q

I found this to be an excellent post. It actually speaks to the OP. Seems concentration of the breath was what was "debated" instead. I also liked this post.

 

I'm surprised noone has mentioned listening to the inner sound, IME its the quickest way to "ensnare" awareness and completely turn the mind inside out. It is very easy for the mind to become obsorbed in sound.

 

This post has been edited by imonous: 04 September 2011 - 10:30 PM

 

For concentration, I recommend focusing of the flame of a candle. Being aware of it's every flicker,

its every movement. Using Friend's guide for reaching goals on the time one can stay focused.

[Sunya]

Buddhist enlightenment is the first step in Taoist alchemy. Taoism is superior to Buddhism. I stand by those statements, having experienced it for myself. I feel no need to justify them or clarify my points to those who won't listen. I'm not defaming Buddhism by saying it. I'm not incapable of understanding Buddhism, or a lower level practitioner or anything, because I hold that point of view.

 

Umm if you make such a ridiculous claim, then yes you should clarify and justify what you mean. Calling a whole tradition 'inferior' is rude to those who follow it. When Vaj was arguing against Taoism here, he argued his points instead of simply relying on himself as an authority figure. "I said so therefore it's true because I'm enlightened" is hardly a valid argument. If you say dumb shit, be prepared to back it up or don't say it at all.

 

It's not that you're 'defaming' Buddhism, but it's that you clearly failed to understand it. I mentioned to you countless times that Buddhist enlightenment isn't just a taste of emptiness, which I know you had and then freaked out. A Buddha is a completely transformed being with omniscience and limitless power and compassion. An enlightened being does not have any negative emotions, and this position is held by all Buddhist traditions. You clearly have anger issues, yet we are to believe that you're enlightened and are thus an authority onto yourself in regards to Buddhism? Sorry pal, as clearly evidenced from how you've been acting, you're far from enlightened.

[Aetherous]

Okay Sunya, this will make you happy: I have not attained Buddhahood.

 

Now is there anything more for you to discuss AT me? Go for it. Get it over with so we can move on, please!

[johndoe2012]

This is often assumed to be true, but where are all of these high level masters we're talking about? Are we sure they are high level masters? How are we sure of this?

 

Well one of these masters is Wang Liping as I read Opening the Dragon Gate.

 

Whether he is really a high level master, that's a good question. When do we know that someone has attained something other than believing in it?

 

I guess that was the point of the maps created. An experience of such and such, that's more or less level X.

 

So what happens when we move outside the map?

 

Who says that everything has been mapped?

[Mal]

Morning all, basically still not sure what to do regarding the moderation issue so if you think you can salvage this thread [please have a go

 

Otherwise go to the follow up here forum and tech support