Further discussion

[Apech]

E ma ho! is an expression of joy and wonder and Dewachen (perfect bliss) is the Pure Land of the Buddha Amitabha.

 

 

[doc benway]

Beautiful post manitou, and thank you for your support and kindness.

I'll only quote the part I want to respond to.

 

 

The Christians remain stuck in their box because their idea of Christ as 'the only one through which one can find redemption' is a barrier to their own transmission from something higher, and I don't recall there being a device in place within the structure of Christianity for ego removal. Nevertheless, some can find it on their own and it radiates through their faces, their actions, their transmission of love to others.

 

 

Not all Christians remain stuck but the institution is designed to keep most that way and is quite effective.

One of the greatest gurus I've been exposed to was Anthony Demello.

He was born Hindu and became a Jesuit priest and psychologist.

His "method" is Awareness (sound familiar?) and Christ for him represents what each Christian must personally become, not simply admire, revere, or even imitate. The process of practicing Awareness liberates the ego. He talks about death and resurrection in terms of death of the ego and rebirth of pure Awareness and Love. Very good stuff and very much in line with what we are talking about and working on in ourselves.

 

You can probably guess what happened to him.

 

Joseph Ratzinger, official censor for the Catholic church, banned all of his works as heresy... before becoming Pope Benedict XVI. Here is a link for anyone interested. It's no surprise that the Church was threatened by the liberating message in Demello's works. Fortunately, popular demand overcame the ban and many of his works are readily available. Sadly, very few Christians (humans) are given an opportunity to benefit from his brilliant perspective.

[doc benway]

Why do I have the feeling you ignore "the state of omniscience" part?

 

I don't think manitou is ignoring omniscience, nor am I.

That is the part that gives rise to genuine bodhicitta.

Not the kind that we exert effort and intent towards, but the kind that is completely spontaneous and effortless.

[manitou]

Steve, your words remind me again of the Nag Hammadi Scriptures, specifically the Secret Book of James (not only a disciple but the actual brother of Jesus). Jesus pulls James aside, because many the other disciples had not grasped the I Am consciousness yet - and directly tells James that the consciousness he seeks is within himself, James - and there's no necessity for an intermediary of any kind, including Jesus. Constantine, when setting up the Christianity structure, certainly didn't want the populous to gnow this. He was looking for control of the people, not independent thinkers. Your reference to the Jesuits is wonderful because they too realize that it's a straight shot to God-consciousness and no intermediary is necessary.

 

I can clearly see that because of your act of grace, Steve, that this thread has become a thing of beauty as opposed to a slugfest. thank you, thank you, thank you.

 

and Apeche, thank you for the beautiful Prayer for Rebirth in Pure Land. How soothing it was to my heart. Once again, Pure Land seems to be the prerequisite.

Edited August 9, 2013 by manitou

[RongzomFan]

Thread has devolved into New Age gnosticism.

[Apech]

Thread has devolved into New Age gnosticism.

 

 

You certainly are the master of the negative one liner ... just when peace was breaking out.

[RongzomFan]

This is a Buddhist subforum. That's all I am saying.

[Apech]

This is a Buddhist subforum. That's all I am saying.

 

 

True ... maybe it should be moved to general (?)

[RongzomFan]

You certainly are the master of the negative one liner ... just when peace was breaking out.

 

Fine whatever.

[RongzomFan]

Constantine, when setting up the Christianity structure, certainly didn't want the populous to gnow this.

 

I used to be a gnostic Christian and then evangelical Christian.

 

The gnostic gospels are heresies. All of them, except Gospel of Thomas, are simply much later inventions.

 

There is no conspiracy by Constantine. Church selected the correct books.

[Jeff]

 

I used to be a gnostic Christian and then evangelical Christian.

 

The gnostic gospels are heresies. All of them, except Gospel of Thomas, are simply much later inventions.

 

There is no conspiracy by Constantine. Church selected the correct books.

How did you come to the conclusion that the Gospel of Thomas is heresy? Heresy to "what"?

[doc benway]

This is a Buddhist subforum. That's all I am saying.

The thread was not started here...

 

edit... but I'm glad it moved here and gave me the opportunity to see how far I have to go!

 

Edited August 9, 2013 by steve

[RongzomFan]

How did you come to the conclusion that the Gospel of Thomas is heresy? Heresy to "what"?

 

I said "except Gospel of Thomas", because that is a special situation.

 

The other gnostic gospels are really quite late inventions. Why would the Church include them in the canon?

[Jeff]

 

I said "except Gospel of Thomas", because that is a special situation.

 

The other gnostic gospels are really quite late inventions. Why would the Church include them in the canon?

If the Church did not include it in canon, why would the Gospel of Thomas be a special situation? Why is it unique?

[Apech]

If the Church did not include it in canon, why would the Gospel of Thomas be a special situation? Why is it unique?

 

 

HINT: Buddhist sub forum (this is).

[RongzomFan]

If the Church did not include it in canon, why would the Gospel of Thomas be a special situation? Why is it unique?

 

Its still heretical, but Thomas dates a little earlier than the other gnostic gospels.

 

Also its form is similar to what some scholars presume to be the original form of all the gospels i.e. just a list of sayings.

[RongzomFan]

If the Church did not include it in canon, why would the Gospel of Thomas be a special situation? Why is it unique?

 

its easier to see why all the other gnostic gospels are late inventions.

[Jeff]

 

 

HINT: Buddhist sub forum (this is).

Ok, sorry. I will drop the topic. Alwayson defining heresies for the early catholic church... :-)

[RongzomFan]

Gnosticism was the Mormonism of its day.

[manitou]

Why do I have the feeling you ignore "the state of omniscience" part?

Hi Alwayson,

 

It occurred to me as I was vacuuming the carpet that I never responded to this question.

 

All I can do is speak for myself. If I were specifically seeking out omniscience, it would come from a place within my ego. In my particular case, this would adversely affect my spiritual development, it would merely bolster ego. I'm thinking that I'm better off just leaving omniscience as a by-product of any gnowledge that is attained within me. I really don't want to be the one standing on my tiptoes trying to prove that I am more knowledgeable than others. I'm sort of heart oriented these days, rather than head oriented. For me, this is much growth.

 

Perhaps my ego for me is more of a problem than it is for you. I come from a background of much control (police and being a weekend warrior in the military), so ego is of particular concern to me; it was the biggest hurdle to try to overcome, and I certainly have not mastered it yet. But I do try, and my proof that I have indeed made some headway is the fact that I've remained sober for 31 years, from a life of degeneracy.

 

Peace to you, friend - and best wishes in your pursuits.

[Tibetan_Ice]

Your own book backtranslates rigpa as vidya, which means knowledge.

 

Do I really have to post all the books that say rigpa=knowledge?

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=9qjS6SXMp7cC&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=rigpa+knowledge&source=bl&ots=2u-Qx7o6IR&sig=tKvkDZCL-Z6_KZg-9DsY4wiu4wQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yF4EUpC4ObS44AOvjIGoBQ&ved=0CCoQ6AEwADge#v=onepage&q=rigpa%20knowledge&f=false

 

Gee Alwaysoff, you are missing the points here.

I'm not interested in a definition of 'rigpa' from a book about shamatha and vispassana, which is what you linked to, we are talking about Dzogchen here. "Buddhahood Without Meditation" is about pure Dzogchen, we are discussing Dzogchen.

 

We are talking about what Dzogchen masters 'transmit' to their students or what Alan Wallace says to break on through to the other side into.

 

Your generic term for rigpa here does not cut it.

[RongzomFan]

http://books.google.com/books?id=djPfDxpq1akC&pg=PA147&dq=rigpa+vidya+knowledge&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YGEFUtLIO67c4AOWsYGQCg&ved=0CDMQuwUwAQ#v=onepage&q=rigpa%20vidya%20knowledge&f=false

[RongzomFan]

was that satisfactory proof that rigpa = knowledge?

[Apech]

was that satisfactory proof that rigpa = knowledge?

 

 

for me yes ... I am thinking here that it is in some degree in contrast to avidya - the ignorance, confusion which is the root cause of samsara. So in other words it is 'seeing things as they really are'= rigpa=vidya.

[RongzomFan]

for me yes ... I am thinking here that it is in some degree in contrast to avidya - the ignorance, confusion which is the root cause of samsara. So in other words it is 'seeing things as they really are'= rigpa=vidya.

 

yes exactly.

 

rigpa vs marigpa

 

vidya vs avidya

 

knowledge vs ignorance